How to get expelled from school - AGW brainwashing our kids at school

Love how the bloke to did the video can't even spell Plimer's name in the titles!

But why did you post this?

I asked you to tell us what the errors in Flannery's book were. Not some rant by a coal industry employee.

You claimed there were errors on Flannery's book. What are they?

 

so D Weston Allen is a nutjob?....really???
LOL just goes to show how IGNORANT you are bud

 

PMSL @ the AGW inquisition.

 

Total manmade Co2 contribution is 3% of the total CO2 in the atmosphere the rest is natural from the Earth's living things.

And lets not forget that water vapour is the most predominate green house gas, shall we also put a price on cloud formation and rain?

So according to these scientist this 3% of CO2 that is manmade is the culprit in global warming!!!!??????

If the people behind the AGW movement can buy off politicians to sell themselves and their country into financial slavery can't they also buy of scientists working in their firms?

Wake up you clowns!!!!!!

The crabon tax/ETS is the first world tax for the new world order full stop.

Its here and its happening right now.

 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion...says-andrew-bolt/story-e6frfhqf-1226004644818

Some of your high priests FAILED climate predictions...your welcome

 

most definetly are we much closer to the US then to any other nation on earth, unfortunately. You are right there.

 

I still don't get it, why some people are insisting, that climate change is not based on our behaviour? This is completely irrelevant.
The climate is changing, and we better try to understand why and do something about it.
So why shouldn't be kids confronted with this subject at school?
John Howard did understand, that as long he keeps us sheep like, we won't stand up and raise against....

 

ah so what caused climate change BEFORE man started to industrialize????
Again a massive FAIL from the warmist cult.

 

There is a direct relationship between level of intelligence and level of belief in global warming. The lower is the former the higher is the latter.

Also I find it curious how a poster stated that "some mining company employee".

Face the cruel facts, none of the people who support global warming would be employeed by a mining company. This is not due to a conspiracy by "big evil miners", this is simply due to the fact that mining companies can afford the best and the smartest.

Global warming and other types of brainwashing propaganda at schools is a real problem.

I personally instruct the kids every day: "You have to go to school, but remember they will lie to you either because they are evil or most likely because they are stupid. Anything you being told at school, must be a subject of extreme scrutiny before you can make any judgement based on that information".

 

People were simply exhaling too much.

LOL

.

 

I'll tell ya why, because 97% of CO2 in our atmosphere is natural and from the Earth and all its living things.

The rest a whoping 3% of CO2 is manmade.

Now are you convinced that this 3% of manmade CO2 is what has caused the Earth's climate to change?

For heavens sake what about the 97% that is natural?????

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total Earth’s Co2 content in the atmosphere is approx 0.0383% by volume

By weight 383 ppm or 0.0582%

Molar mass = 44.0095 g/mole

Mean molar mass air = 28.97 g/mole

0.0383% x [44.0095/28.97] = 0.0582% Co2
--------------------------------------------

Man's contribution,

Man's contribution by volume is 0.001149% CO2

Man's contribution by weight is 0.001746% CO2

That's percentage right??!!!

OR

by volume 0.00001149

by weight 0.00001746
---------------------------------------------

Yes our tiny contribution of 3% is responsible for the Earth's climate change what a SCAM.

The Earth's climate has always been changing and always will until the end of the Earth.

What was the Earth like when it first formed????!!!! its come along way yeh and theirs heaps more climate change to come.

To suggest that humans can control the Earth's climate is dumb and dumber.

Its the only way the powers to be could pass a global tax on all peoples on this Earth and you know what its only the start their are going to be more global taxes to come.

Most probably all in the name of saving the Earth for our children and grand children.

But if you dont believe just wait a few years after the carbon tax and ETS systems are in, you will see that they will not reduce emmissions one bit.

The farming of carbon credits and sucking billions out of nations is what this is all about.

The brain washing of our kids at school ro accept AGW as a fact that cannot be disputed is discraceful at best.

 

You claimed there were errors on Flannery's book. What are they?


How many times have you avoided the question now? 4? 5 times?

You claimed there were errors on Flannery's book. Either show us what these errors are - or admit you were just regurgitating crap from some nutbags blog, and you don't actually know of any factual errors in Flannery's book.

 

So which part of the denier ladder to you stand?

Are you denying the evidence of what greenhouse gasses do?
Are you denying the evidence that the atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased over the past century or so?
Are you denying the evidence that the majority of this increase in atmospheric CO2 has been anthropogenic?
Are you denying the evidence that the surface temperature of the planet has been increasing?
Are you denying the evidence that the ocean temperatures have been increasing?
Are you denying the evidence that sea levels have been increasing?
Are you denying the evidence that glacial mass balance is decreasing?
Are you denying the evidence that glacial mass balance is decreasing?
Are you denying the evidence that stratospheric temperature is decreasing?
Are you denying the evidence downward radiation in the frequency bands re-emitted by CO2 is decreasing?

Are you one of these deniers that likes to pick out a specific issue you have trouble with? Or are you just your regular blind Bolt disciple who denies everything?

My guess is the latter. You will spout your "beliefs (or Bolt and Jones beliefs - channelled though their gullible listeners) - but be completely incapable of explaining these "beliefs"

 

And you have shown that you have a reading AND COMPREHENSION problem. I have told you where to find the info yet you choose not to. Sorry bugs but i aint your dog and the LIES in flannerys book are both well known and widely discussed.

 

You claimed there were errors on Flannery's book. What are they?

How many times have you avoided the question now? 5? 6 times?

Admit it. You were just regurgitating some crap you read on some nutbag blog.

If you knew of factual errors in Flannery's book - you would tell us. But you don't. So you can't.

Great going champ.

 

straws....your clutching at them.

 

nutjob blog would = warmist cult propaganda... no i dont read such rubbish but you on the other hand

 

WTF?!?!? BOLT?!?!
You are kidding aren't you! Using someone found guilty in a court of distortions of truth as your source?!?!? Seriously?!?!

Let's look at some of Mr Bolt's analysis shall we?

but no - Flannery did not predict cities such as Brisbane would never again have dam-filling rains:

Flannery's comments were not in any way controversial. He was speaking during a severe drought - and pointing out that if the drought conditions were to continue, Australian cities would face great difficulties. Obviously in the past 2 years - La Nina conditions have returned (exceptionally severe La Nina conditions as it turned out - and the warmest La Nina ever recorded), but El Nino will return again. And when it does - with increased temperature due to AGW - there will be a further decrease in the amount of runoff reaching water storage.


BTW - we are still waiting to hear what these errors in his book are.

 

You claimed there were errors on Flannery's book. What are they?

How many times have you avoided the question now? 6? 7 times?

Admit it. You were just regurgitating some crap you read on some nutbag blog.

If you knew of factual errors in Flannery's book - you would tell us. But you don't. So you can't.

Great going champ.

 

You claimed there were errors on Flannery's book. What are they?

 

READ the book and find out...it aint that hard bugs

 

Bugs if i may, not directed at you personally just answering the questions as i believe it.

Are you denying the evidence of what greenhouse gasses do?

No this is true

Are you denying the evidence that the atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased over the past century or so?

No this is true it went from approximately 280 to 380.

So are the nations involved in the industrial revolution that caused this rise in CO2 emissions going to pay their back taxes in carbon credits to the United Nations and Wall Street?

That’s what I want to know, because if they’re not going to pay their dues why should anybody else get penalized from now onwards.

Are you denying the evidence that the majority of this increase in atmospheric CO2 has been anthropogenic?

Yes this cannot be proven, how such a small amount of manmade CO2 in the atmosphere can have such a big impact on the Earth’s climate changing, this one is FALSE, a phurphy a great lie, a con job, utter sh!t.

Who started this grusade Al Gore say no more, he’s working for Goldman Sachs.

It’s also a proven fact that 95% of global warming is directly related to how much water vapour is in the Earth’s atmosphere that’s 95% of global warming.

So how can you relate 95% of global warming that’s 95% global warming,
to the (3% of 0.000383) manmade CO2 =0.00001149.

(Total CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere at present is approx. 0.0383% that’s percentage)

That’s 0.000383 out of 1.0

Your saying this is the prime reason the Earth is heating up, I say bullocks take your head out of the sand my friend, because 95% of global warming is due to water vapour, would you like to also tax cloud formation and rain I ask you.

Are you denying the evidence that the surface temperature of the planet has been increasing?

No this is true BUT it isn’t because of the 3% manmade CO2 that’s for sure.
Have a read here

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ProtonOzone/

Are you denying the evidence that the ocean temperatures have been increasing?

Have a read here
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ProtonOzone/
http://www.greatglobalwarming.com/

Are you denying the evidence that sea levels have been increasing?

Have a read here
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ProtonOzone/
http://www.greatglobalwarming.com/

Are you denying the evidence that glacial mass balance is decreasing?

The arctic is in decline the Antarctic is on the increase, it’s called climate change and is part of the Earths vibrant form.

Have a read here
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ProtonOzone/


Are you denying the evidence that glacial mass balance is decreasing?

Have a read here
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ProtonOzone/
http://www.greatglobalwarming.com/


Are you denying the evidence that stratospheric temperature is decreasing?

Have a read here
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ProtonOzone/
http://www.greatglobalwarming.com/


Are you denying the evidence downward radiation in the frequency bands re-emitted by CO2 is decreasing?

Have a read here
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ProtonOzone/
http://www.greatglobalwarming.com/

 

its going to funny as to see flannery and co lose their jobs once the libs win the next election...bye bye warmist cult lying freaks...

 

completely irrelevant!
The climate is changing rapidly, and we have to deal with it. That's all, and its not rocket science.
We have to deal with those problems, better sooner then later..

 

The climate has ALWAYS changed ...and always will. Your pathetic cult will soon be out on its ear.

You failed to explain what caused climate change BEFORE man industrialized.