More “Inconvenient Truths” On Global Warming

ANTARCTICA ADDED ICE … LOTS OF IT New research published in last week’s Journal of Glaciology (which we subscribe to, naturally) reveals that Antarctica has not been losing ice – as the “global warmers” at the United Nations have repeatedly claimed. Wait … there’s more global warming B.S.? Yes … In…


New research published in last week’s Journal of Glaciology (which we subscribe to, naturally) reveals that Antarctica has not been losing ice – as the “global warmers” at the United Nations have repeatedly claimed.

Wait … there’s more global warming B.S.?

Yes …

In fact not only has the world’s southernmost continent not been losing ice, it’s been adding it112 billion tons of it, to be precise.

That’s the amount of ice the Antarctic ice sheet gained from 1992 to 2001, according to researchers from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, the University of Maryland in College Park (Go Terps!), and engineering firm Sigma Space Corporation – all of whom have been closely monitoring years of satellite data.

Another 82 billion tons of ice was added from 2003 to 2008, the researchers claim.

As a result, Antarctica isn’t raising global sea level by 0.27 millimeters – as the United Nations claims – but instead “is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” according to the researchers.

Wow …

Not surprisingly, the global warmers have an excuse …

“Climate scientists caution that these findings don’t mean it’s time to start celebrating the end of global warming,” The Christian Science Monitor reported.  “More than anything, the paper shows how difficult it is to measure ice height in Antarctica and that better tools are needed.”

Of course!

We’ve said it before, we’ll say it again: You cannot argue with a global warmer because they see nothing but validation of their theory in any and every meteorological measurement.

“Hot summer?  Global warming.  Cold winter?  Global warming.  Cool summer?  Global warming.  Mild winter?  Yeah … you’re getting it,” we wrote earlier this year.

And if you don’t embrace their view …. watch out.


Related posts

US & World

Amanda Cunningham: The Reach For Freedom

Amanda Cunningham

Letter: About That Semiconductor Guest Column …


Joe Biden Dials It Back In Ukraine

Will Folks


CorruptionInColumbia November 3, 2015 at 4:21 pm

Fits, “global warming” has to be real. Al Gore , the Government, and the MSM, tell us so. Just ask my little troll that follows me around. He’ll tell you, also!

Mark Petereit November 3, 2015 at 4:32 pm

“Better tools are needed” = please fund my “better tools” research with a big, fat government grant.

Rakkasan November 3, 2015 at 5:35 pm

Ditto, “We can’t move forward on this until we have more data on which to base our decision”

Translated: Big utilities don’t want to cede profit to solar or haven’t figured out a way to exploit it yet.

The Colonel November 3, 2015 at 6:28 pm

Hardly, big utilities have been sucking the gubamint teat for years now building wind farms and solar arrays with funding heavily subsidized by said big gubamint. The one problem with all those alternative energy sources? Same one they’ve had since day one, what do you do when the wind dies and the sun goes down. Until that problem is resolved with a storage system, alternative energy will not be profitable and will not be reliable as a sole production source.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 6:41 pm

hey i admit solondra was a fail, but china is spending trillions on renewable energy, it is only in our best interest to lead the world in renewable energy, i’m not preaching plug the oil wells but we need to keep innovating and lead the world in renewable energy.

The Colonel November 3, 2015 at 6:51 pm

China is spending billions building stuff we designed with stolen technology and reverse engineering. Despite all of that they still can’t produce enough energy to support their needs. 89% of their power comes from the evil hydro, coal, nuclear triad. The VAST MAJORITY is nasty cheap incredibly polluting coal (66%).

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 6:57 pm
The Colonel November 3, 2015 at 8:40 pm

Not suggesting you are, just that the picture isn’t what you want to think. From the article you posted: “..So far, solar is China’s biggest upside with dozens of companies facing overcapacity and no official support for the industry….”

China was counting on supplying everyone else with. “green tech” while continuing to build coal fired plants. They closed lots of little inefficient ones to much hoopla in the press and among the greenies while quietly building even more large plants. Problem is, they’re still burning the far less efficient and more polluting lignite coal (half their dwindling coal reserves are lignite).

Meanwhile, the U.S.has the largest coal reserves in the world, most of it anthracite and our gubamint is trying to shut plants down.

sparklecity November 3, 2015 at 10:08 pm

Obviously you have never lived in an area that experienced the rape of an entire mountain or had to move because your well was sunk because they blasted the rock and rendered your well dry like my relatives have had to endure. Or choke because of black lung even though they never smoked a cigarette in your life when the Coal owners/operators claimed there was no such thing as Black Lung.
Oh yeah, throw a few yards of top soil back on the stripped area, plant a few pine trees and claim that it’s back to the way it used to be.
I’m first generation non-coal miner whose father, both grandfathers and both great grandfathers mined the coal in Appalachia in West by God Virginia,eastern Kentucky and SW Virginia for nearly 100 years and still have a few cousins working – the ones that ain’t broke up that is……
You wanna go back to in-line/underground mining which would provide jobs in Appalachia again, fine with me but it is much cheaper to strip a mountain (takes way less manpower) and fuck it up forever.
Underground mining with the jobs that come along with it – OK by me but don’t come bitching to me because the price of coal just went up by 20-40 % or more.
Guess what, unless oil get to $200/barrel it ain’t gonna happen.
In my old community there are no children (haven’t been for almost 10 years – the average age is around 70) All the high schools in my home county consolidated due to declining population.
The migration out of the mines started in the mid-60’s WAY before right wingnuts started bitching about global warming and that “Obammer” was fucking up the coal industry.
They closed the mining company and the coal camp that my father and grandfathers worked back around 1965, moved everyone out destroyed all the houses (because they owned them) and strip mined every fucking piece of dirt within a 5 mile radius. You wouldn’t even know that at one time over 5,000 people lived there. And guess what, it still is a fucked up piece of topography that ain’t fit to piss on
You know why?? Because it was cheaper to strip mine than have 1,000 miners dig seams of coal underground – that’s why.

The Colonel November 3, 2015 at 11:01 pm

Definitely not in favor of mountain top removal mining but shaft mining is far more dangerous and has nearly as many environmental problems.

My point really has little to do with coal at all and more to do with the ridiculous idea that we’re ready to switch over to a “green grid”. China probably had the highest production of solar devices and yet they make very little use of them – mainly because of the storage issue I described earlier. Many ideas have been tried, using over production to pump water back up hill, “solar sinks”, batteries, fly wheel storage. None of these techniques had been effective to the point of being economically viable.

Oil has been artificially kept at unrealistic prices. We’re not running out any time soon and we’ll need it even after we solve our spouse problem. The us has sufficient oil for our needs near term without fracking. Solar will eventually get to an economically viable system but we’re not there yet and I’d guess we’re twenty five years away. There’s no reason to destroy our economy or our life style for a problem that will eventually be solved.

sparklecity November 4, 2015 at 9:08 am

“Mountain Top Removal” is an coal industry/financial driven politically correct term for STRIP MINING ———————–OK???
Underground mining has a much smaller footprint on the area than strip mining but without a doubt is more expensive. Environmental problems are nowhere as serious as strip mining. Mine safety in America has improved exponentially(partially due to the “evil’ UMWA – now damn near defunct) and federal safety regulations (there go those damn feds fucking with free enterprise again).
When I was a kid we could fish in the creek in our community. After they started strip mining the fish population declined due to silting and the creek started to flood because of the excessive runoff because the rainfall ran straight off the slopes downhill
As posted the decline of the coal mining industry in Appalachia started before the EPA was even established. The demand for coke to fire the furnaces in the steel mills diminished due to more steel being imported (direct relation between the decline of the American steel industry and imports) which resulted in less demand for coal.
I remember kids in my elementary school moving up north in the early 60’s where the jobs were. There was a bump in mining jobs after the oil “crisis” due to guess what???–the Yom Kippur War….then later the bottom fell out. In the early 90’s there were articles in the Charlotte Observer about influx of “hillbillies” moving into the greater Charlotte area and the cops and social services having problems with them. By then the migration to the north and west was not an option and the south was growing – basically it was the only game in town.
Anyone who wants to put the blame on the decline of coal during the past few years is blowing smoke.
At present that’s the only thing they have an excuse to bitch about.
In one form or another there will be a reason to mine coal again but it will be years away. I just hope and pray that strip mining won’t be the way to mine it.

The Colonel November 4, 2015 at 9:26 am

No, there are five distinctive types of surface mining practiced in the US:
Strip (shallow layer of overburden is removed to get at targeted materials)
Pit (a deep hole is dug to get at targeted materials)
Mountain top removal (the top of a mountain is removed and then pit mining completes the effort)
Dredge (below water materials are scooped up via a variety of methods and then processed to get at targeted materials)
Highwall (Mechanical mining used a “push beam cutter” to follow a identified seam of desirable materials – the least destructive method of surface mining)

Additionally, there are three prevalent types of subsurface mining: Shaft, Drift, Slope

All are very different. The primary difference in mountain top removal and strip is that strip mining can occur anywhere from the valley floor up. Generally strip mining is done to mine materials relatively close to the surface (lignite is a primary target as are many ores) Strip mines can generally be terraced and refilled with the leftovers to resort the environment somewhat.

Mountaintop removal is an animal of a different species, it involves the literal removal of a mountain top with explosives and then open pit mining often removing more than 500 feet of peak. The mountain peaks formed by plate movement often push targeted materials relatively close to the surface at the peak of mountain ranges. There is no way to even minimally restore a landscape mined with this method. Mountaintop removal mining is by far the most objectionable method for environmentalist and nature lovers

sparklecity November 4, 2015 at 10:10 am

I’m NOT talking about surface mining in all it’s forms……….My focus and life experience is on strip mining of the Appalachian region.
“Strip mines can be generally be terraced and refilled with the leftovers to “resort” (I’m sure you meant “restore”) the environment somewhat”
Wanna take a trip with me “back home” to West by God Virginia, eastern Kentucky or SW Virginia to see shitloads of “somewhat environmental restoration”?????
We can take shots at beer cans and liquor bottles while we’re at it…..score some meth if you wanna……

Tazmaniac November 3, 2015 at 7:02 pm

Solyndra was a political payback scam that screwed a lot of innocent workers. Cleaner energy sources should be explored as the market bears it’s expense. Anything else is corrupt crony BS.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 7:08 pm

so we agree, the issue is what % the market can bare. seems that we should find a compromise a figure between what the right and the left want, as for me something is better than nothing, i would go there.

Tazmaniac November 3, 2015 at 7:14 pm

Who wouldn’t want the Golden Goose of renewable energy? Sadly with every good idea there comes the greedy to suck all the development money up in scams.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 7:16 pm

so what do we do? crawl under a rock, or break out the bird finger and soldier on?

Tazmaniac November 3, 2015 at 7:25 pm

I still have faith in the logic that it will be developed by people, maybe greedy people who will develop it for a profit motive. Look at aviation and the mobile phone.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 7:31 pm

we the people will determine the environment for these innovations to develope

Tazmaniac November 3, 2015 at 6:56 pm

That is just the production negatives, the maintenance is the killer. And these dolts don’t stop to consider the chemicals involved with going green.

The Colonel November 3, 2015 at 7:39 pm

Polluting in the production, disposal and maintenance side as well killing birds….

Rakkasan November 4, 2015 at 4:15 pm

Intersting to hear your environmentalist side. Watch out, someone might call you a tree hugger. Never mind. That only happens when someone is against a policy or plan.

Can we compare fossil fuel’s environment cost to renewables, or is this “I’ll choose the comparison criteria that fits my argument”? “When you argue variables A & B, I’ll argue C & D.”

The Colonel November 4, 2015 at 4:43 pm

I’d drive an electric car if it would go 300 miles and refuel in ten minutes. My greenness is more about saving me greenness in the form of dollars. I built a fully functional solar oven capable of getting to 500 degrees on a good day in 1974. I’ve built a couple of off grid plants with varying success due to budget constraints and my own inept designs. What I’m planning for the spring will be a permanent, whole house plus system that should provide 24/7/365 power without a battery bank but we’ve already run a power line to the site and will also install a generator. The owners intent is to be of grid, the location makes wind and solar impractical though we will install a small solar array with battery storage as a caretaker system when the house is closed up.

Right now arguing renewable versus traditional is pointless because every single form of “renewable” energy requires a traditional form of energy as a back up. In fact, the best solar plant in California is a net green house gas contributor –

Rakkasan November 5, 2015 at 8:10 am

For a guy who has such a history of serving, I’m surprised that your greenness is all about you. Renewable now is not pointless when you consider all of the costs and benefits. Otherwise, I’d have to believe that all those efforts in the US and abroad are, to use your word, pointless. BTW, in other countries, a substantial part of the costs involved resulted from a decision to give industries a pass in paying ‘their fair share”

The Colonel November 5, 2015 at 8:25 am

If I can make my micro hydro penstock design work, I’ll share.

erneba November 3, 2015 at 8:38 pm

Coal ash heap piles will pale in comparison to broken up piles of solar panels and the chemicals they contain.

erneba November 3, 2015 at 8:38 pm

I have been preaching that for years when people start talking and espousing the virtues of converting to wind and solar power. These people don’t realize yet that the best we will ever be able to achieve is a supplement for our current mode of power generation.
There is nothing wrong with solar an wind power if it can be done economically, but it will never come near, in our lifetime and maybe our children’s lifetime of replacing our current modes of power generation.

The Colonel November 3, 2015 at 8:50 pm

I’ve had a vertical Savonius wind mill running in my back yard off and on since my college senior’s junior year of highschool. Wind tech works when it works. I’ll be building a microscale hydro plant at a friend’s cabin this summer as an experiment in off grid living. Neither plants are reliable enough to not also have access to the grid and without a huge, dangerous, expensive battery farm, solar isn’t practical either.

Rakkasan November 4, 2015 at 10:15 am

Maybe it would have if we would have seriously started in the mid-90s like other counties. Their 20 year gov’t support plans are running out, but now costs have come down so much that it’s not the impossibility it might have once been. And, many have figured ways to deal with disposal/recycle of old equipment. Nobody is making the argument that that wind/solar will affect a 100% replacement of fossil fuels and nuclear, nor are they arguing that there aren’t costs involved. But one of the costs in that is figured in is the cost to the environment of continuing to have vast majority of energy provided via fossil fuels. Again, maybe if we hadn’t let Big Oil and Gas convince/persuade us of all the reasons this development wasn’t possible (to their benefit), we’d have made much more progress with making this feasible.

Rakkasan November 4, 2015 at 8:22 am

Straw man argument. And, it’s not like Big Oil and Gas and utilities in general haven’t been in the gov’t’s pocket and vice versa.

The Colonel November 4, 2015 at 8:38 am

Yeah, exactly as I’ve said

Rakkasan November 4, 2015 at 8:45 am

I was referring to your 1st comment

The Colonel November 4, 2015 at 9:44 am

So was I.

Rakkasan November 4, 2015 at 4:20 pm

Hit “restart/reboot”

Your counter wasn’t about the premise. Nobody was claiming that solar or renewables would replace fossil fuels or nuclear 100%, but that was your counter. And, you describe solar’s receipt of gov’t support as something that makes it less desirable that fossils fuel, as if they don’t do the same thing.

Lost in Translation

Deborah Frank November 4, 2015 at 5:27 am


.?my neighbor’s aunt is making $98 HOURLY on the lap-top?….A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, $17k Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over $87, p/h..Learn More right Here….
??? http://GlobalWorldEmploymentsVacanciesReportCheck//GetPaid/$97hourly… ?????????????????????????????????????????????????

Centrist View November 3, 2015 at 4:33 pm

And since 2008?

Rakkasan November 3, 2015 at 4:38 pm

Memo to FITS: “The term global warming is no longer used to describe dramatic shifts in climate” But the term “shill” is still used to describe people who are the paid shadow mouthpieces for Big Oil And Gas.

“I know nothing. Nothing.”
SGT Shultz

apathy November 3, 2015 at 6:47 pm

Yes…call it climate change so every time the weather changes we can take their money and their freedom…they are just too dumb to notice…

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 6:52 pm

just what freedom are you loosing acknowledging there is climate change?

Chewin' the cud November 3, 2015 at 10:48 pm

Acknowledging climate change isn’t really the problem, the problem is agreement on what is causing it and the remedy.

The freedom gets lost on the “remedy” part if blame is assigned to cars & cow farts. First they take everyone’s money to study cars & cow farts, then they force car manufacturers to build shitty choked down cars that you have to pay more for via emission components and you have to pay for GMO cow milk and meat that comes from cows that have their genes modified to fart ozone friendly gas.

Rakkasan November 4, 2015 at 4:28 pm

So, it’s all about you then? If you feel that strongly about it, go to a tuner shop and have them do a workaround on your car’s ECM. And your cow story, more like a BS story than a cow fart.

And if that is a matter of “freedom” to you, iI think I hear the Clue Phone ringing. “Freedom” doesn’t just mean getting what you want. It doesn’t mean ignoring public health needs (not the cow, in general) in favor of your preferences. I wouldn’t waste my time responding to your angry troll posts, but I do because your sense of self-centered “individualism” (except of when it suits YOU) is at the heart of philosophical divide between the parties

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 4:42 pm Reply
Rakkasan November 3, 2015 at 5:19 pm

More like science or FITS.

“The great thing about science is that it’s true whether you believe it or not”

Neil DeGrasse Tyson

Soft Sigh from Hell November 3, 2015 at 7:57 pm

“And Yet It Moves” — Galileo

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 7:59 pm

that should be the slogan for metecucil

heliocentric November 3, 2015 at 6:49 pm

Yes…they said the same thing to Galileo…

Torch November 3, 2015 at 4:51 pm

Fits didn’t read or present the whole article or chose not to present it.

Same As Last Time November 3, 2015 at 5:18 pm

Last time he cherry picked from a report saying global ice was doing fine to say polar bears weren’t in danger. The full report said that Arctic ice was sharply declining and that global ice was offset by Antarctic ice, you know, the kind of ice that means nothing to polar bears.

sparklecity November 3, 2015 at 10:24 pm

Right because Polar Bears don’t live in the Antarctic…..
Also, Rush Limpballs likes to brag that polar bear population is increasing while leaving out the fact that a lot of mammals increase their population as a last ditch effort to stay off extinction due to declining environmental conditions.

shifty henry November 4, 2015 at 12:28 am

Up in the frozen wastes of the Yukon, a
young polar bear asked its mother, “Mommy, am I your natural child?”


“You mean, it was you and Dad and the whole thing. I’m the result. Right?”

“Right. Why don’t you discuss it with your father?”

The youngster waited until his father
returned from a day’s fishing with dinner, and then asked, “Am I your real son,

“Of course.”

“A natural son and all of that?”

“Yes, Why do you ask?”

“Because to tell you the truth, Pop, I’m freezing!”

sparklecity November 4, 2015 at 9:53 am

A “golden oldie” if there ever was one!!!!!!

Native Ink November 3, 2015 at 8:15 pm

Thanks for doing the job of reading the article and calling the deniers on their BS. I used to dig into these articles just to see how the deniers were twisting the truth, but after a while, I learned not to waste my time. They’re always twisting the science (or just plain don’t understand it) and yet when you try to show them what scientists are really saying about climate change, of course they won’t listen. Thanks again for doing the thankless work of disproving the idiotic Oil Industry propaganda.

KillTheMessenger November 3, 2015 at 4:58 pm

Looked out the window lately ?

Rakkasan November 3, 2015 at 5:11 pm

Yeah. It’s called weather

Rocky Verdad November 3, 2015 at 5:05 pm

Well what about 16 Cat 3 or higher hurricanes worldwide this year – a new record.

Quietus November 3, 2015 at 5:09 pm

Standard operating procedure for El Nino. We’ve only had good records on the number of hurricanes globally since the beginning of the weather satellite era. 1965ish forward.

Quietus November 3, 2015 at 5:07 pm

The original author in PopSci is about as unbiased as they come . She’s a shill for the Climate Change, Global Weirding, Warmist, Global Warming, etc industry.…19147.27912.0.28180.…0…1.1.64.serp..12.13.1097.dX0Gg_2_oaA

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 5:30 pm

just google her name, the list of publications she contributes to is quite impressive you like those left wing nut job magazines like Scientific America and lets not for get that uber lefty rag Smithsonian.

Quietus November 3, 2015 at 5:40 pm

Not in disagreement that her writing resume is quite impressive but on this one specific thing I don’t think she completely unbiased. If you want to argue climate change that’s fine but the climate has been changing since the Earth has been orbiting it’s fancy little star. Man made climate change is being proven on scant evidence with good measurements going back only about 150 years and some metrics such as satellite data only 50 or less. We didn’t have arctic an antarctic ice coverage estimates until 1979. All I am saying is before we go doing drastic things that damage the economy we better be damned sure what we are doing is correct and it will fix or at least mitigate the problem. Right now neither of those conditions can be met.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 6:26 pm

we are on the same page, the changes need to be be incremental but conservatives fight any change, talking about chicken littles, youall act as if we support any green energy, the dam is gonna burst and liberals are come rushing through the breach and ruin america

Quietus November 3, 2015 at 6:53 pm

I don’t have a problem with the change as long as it makes sense. We’re going to run out of oil one day we just don’t know when that day is. It makes sense to have something in place before we hit “peak oil” or whatever you want to call it because as soon as we stop being able to increase production prices will skyrocket, the same goes for Natural Gas, and Coal. I’d personally like to see more hydro-power in the east and solar installed in the desert southwest, because that makes good sense. I’d also like to see more nuclear reactors put in place for electric production but not the 1950s style stuff we are still using. Even the new AP1000s that are being built by Westinghouse are much better safety wise than the older PWRs and BWRs that were built in the 1950s through the mid 1980s. Thorium makes sense so do breeder reactors at least until we can figure out controlled fusion. Once controlled fusion should be the end of our energy needs forever, the we can stop arguing about it.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 7:01 pm

right on right on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but this is an important issue for america today, we really need to find some common ground and get to work now.

Arctic Meltdown November 3, 2015 at 5:12 pm

Antarctic ice can rise as much as it wants, but if Arctic ice is melting at a faster rate (hint: it is) then we still have a problem. Since water levels are still rising globally, I’d say we still have a problem.

Must be nice to keep your head in the sand. Fewer problems to face that way.

Bible Thumper November 3, 2015 at 5:24 pm

Must be tough being Chicken Little. Frightened by problems that don’t exist.

Hawkeye November 3, 2015 at 5:32 pm

Clearly a case of SDS–small dick syndrome

sparklecity November 3, 2015 at 10:18 pm

Chicken Little my hillbilly ass—–Shit, I wish I had a dollar for every rightwing nut saying there was a threat under every rock or behind every tree.
All you hear from your kind is the world is going to hell in a hand basket and has been ever since the Declaration Of Independence was signed
if that ain’t the pot calling the kettle black I don’t know what is

Bible Thumper November 3, 2015 at 10:37 pm

“””the world is going to hell”””
That’s not me. You listen to too much talk radio, cable or spend too much time on the internet. Meet more regular people. I bet a lot of my type had a great time at the Reverend’s Great big band or whatever the name is. The world is a wonderful place.

sparklecity November 4, 2015 at 9:49 am

Number 1: I “flip’ the radio to talk radio maybe 5 minutes per day – because it’s basically the same shit different day – I have absolutely no idea how someone can listen to that shit hour after hour……Satellite radio is my primary medium for information and listening entertainment both in my car and in my office. (that’s how I found out about Reverend Payton’s Big Damn Band on the Blues channel – Sirius/”FM” channel 70)
*****Guess I’d better cut back on my 3 times/week work outs at the “Y”, riding my motorsikle, having weekly breakfasts with a retired military bunch,attending technical conferences, attending local high school sports events, taking my Rottweller out for his morning “romp in the woods”, being a “Cattle Baron” (a thundering herd of 2), competing in gun club shooting matches and having some well earned beers and a burger on the weekends (not to mention “cheap wing night” on Tuesdays) so I can get out and meet more “regular” people like yourself that are know-it-all pessimists.*****
Your “type” wouldn’t know how to act at a “roots” music concert let alone appreciate it.
Enjoy your next trip to Branson for some good old-fashioned family fun…….have some ice cream on me!!!

Bible Thumper November 4, 2015 at 10:13 am

You said,”Shit, I wish I had a dollar for every rightwing nut saying there was a threat under every rock or behind every tree.”

Where are you meeting these people? I never see them in person. Only in the media.

Rakkasan November 4, 2015 at 4:29 pm

I know you’ve been to church lately.

sparklecity November 5, 2015 at 10:54 am

Every time I go to a Tea Party meeting the room is full of them!!
Come to the Clock on Reidville Road in Spartanburg the first Tuesday of the month for their monthly meeting and you will see shit loads of folks seeing a threat under every rock and behind every tree
You really live a sheltered life don’t you???

Bible Thumper November 5, 2015 at 11:36 am

— seeing a threat under every rock and behind every tree —
That is where they came from -from under rocks and behind trees.
I have learned to make a distinction between the general public that agree with Tea party principles and actual members who show up for meetings.

A perfect example is when Haley was interviewed by Tea Party group before her 2008 election. Half the questions were about the causes of the Civil War and the Confederate Flag. Mostly nuts show up at those meetings. They are the same ones who post comments at Fitsnews. They would never vote for Haley or Graham, yet they win primaries and general elections by wide margins.

TARevolution November 3, 2015 at 5:14 pm

But EVERY Vote for a Liberal-Tarian is a license to these IGNORANT-ASS, Flat-Earther Radical Leftwing Global Warming Hoax-Nut-jobbers to Reach in to the pocket of Producing Ameirans, and rob them blind….so Obama – and the Democrat Party- can pay off their lazy-ass voters…

Rocky Verdad November 3, 2015 at 5:14 pm

Those attorney’s in Hampton are looking for ya!!!

Dumb Voter November 3, 2015 at 5:15 pm

Urrrrghhhhhh… U sownd smrt. I voat saym way as u.

TARevolution November 3, 2015 at 6:24 pm

I probably sound like a Fucking Genius to you. You sound a like a typical leftwing Dumbass……You Ass–Backward liberal dolts, can’t think for yourselves..

And as long as they can keep you as fucking stupid as you…Democrats can win elections.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 6:34 pm

sadly, the only intelligent post i ever read from you was about Mark Knoffler, the rest of your posts are just ugly hysterics, say what you want, but you appear to act like your world is out of control and right wing dogma is the only solution to fix your life. what is it about solar panels and windmills that scares you so?

TARevolution November 4, 2015 at 8:53 am

I despise lies, corruption and deceitful people who manipulate the malleable to feed your greed and maintain your position of political bullying…

If you are not repulsed by injustice and wrongdoing – as is practiced by the very nature of the Democrat Party – you are a lost and sick soul…

You are thieves, bigots, racists and selfish. When you win, decent and good people lose…America – and Americans- are damaged and lessened when liberals control.

And EVERY WORD of what I posted is True. You either know that, or you are stupid, or in denial.

Centrist View November 3, 2015 at 5:17 pm

Looks like a declining trend.
1992 to 2001: +112 billion tons
2003 to 2008: + 82 billion tons (27% less than 1992 to 2001)
“In more bad news, the researchers also predict that this long-term ice gain will only outweigh losses for another couple of decades, before catching up and finally creating an overall loss.”

Bible Thumper November 3, 2015 at 5:48 pm

They have been wrong on Antarctic ice decline, but their predictions for future declines are Gospel.

Tazmaniac November 3, 2015 at 5:28 pm

Every “leader” of the UN should be in Guantaname. There are only two types of proponents of this BS. the ones who plan on gaining profit and/or power and the poor pitiful kool-aide drinking believers.

A. Weiner November 3, 2015 at 5:39 pm

Come on “moderator”. You’re really going to delete my “Click Bait” song post? Come on Will, don’t be so thin skinned. We’re only funning’ here, right?

west_rhino November 3, 2015 at 5:53 pm

Ahhh Flat earthers rule!

celcius November 3, 2015 at 5:56 pm

Shhh…don’t tell the truth…crooked pols have millions more to make from this scam
…fear sells and you are blowing their cover!

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 6:05 pm

note to kooks as you have been railing against liberals accusing us of raising your cost of living while sc republican lawmakers have quietly let scanna raise your electric rate by 50% over the last decade, hell they even let them have a rate hike because the price of natural gas went up, and they don’t even use it. while you are fighting the green movement because they may in the future cause rate hikes, you are taking up the whazoo from scana.

Soft Sigh from Hell November 3, 2015 at 6:46 pm

What the rubes don’t realize is that all you have to do is make it snow more in a very cold place, even if it is getting warmer (less cold), and ice still accumulates. You are measuring precipitation changes, not temperature.

What the realists know is that starker evidence comes from transitional areas, like the ends of glaciers and the edges of tundra and tree-lines and so forth.

But forget all that, on to a subject more in keeping here. Is Jimmy Metts the buggerer or buggeree in that high-end hoosegow?

Native ink November 3, 2015 at 7:06 pm

Usually you can do a little research and find out the study was done by a biased group or doesn’t really say what the deniers claim it says. After doing this about 10 times I dont even bother anymore.

Tazmaniac November 3, 2015 at 7:09 pm

Has correspondence popped up about their plans to scam the world? Tha kind of stuff tends to make me sick.

idcydm November 3, 2015 at 7:39 pm

Read what Dr. Patrick Moore the founder of Greenpeace has to say. I know it’s on Breitbart London but don’t let that scare you away.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 7:47 pm

only patrick moore is not a founder of greenpeace, he is a paid lobbyist who claims that, so yoyos like you can post inaccurate shit. the real shame is you posted a load of bullshit and you will not even be embarrassed.

idcydm November 3, 2015 at 9:08 pm

The former President of Greenpeace Canada, is that better? Why should I be embarrassed, the lobbyist group Greenpeace and it’s followers never are.

stumpknocker November 3, 2015 at 9:16 pm

because that is not so?

idcydm November 3, 2015 at 9:18 pm

What is not so?

Bible Thumper November 4, 2015 at 8:32 am

Interesting article. I don’t have the scientific knowledge to evaluate it but, I shudder to think how squalid and desperate our lives would be without the industrial revolution which was driven by fossil fuels.

Native Ink November 4, 2015 at 9:03 pm

He’s not a founder, just an early member. Then he went totally off the rails and resurfaced as a paid shill for the oil industry. With the millions of people who are environmentalists, it’s just common sense that one or two would go join the dark side and get PAID, PAID, PAID.

ELCID November 4, 2015 at 3:31 pm

The real scare is actually natural global cooling.

Just as predicted in 1976 and reported today by scientist studying the sun. The world is going to enter a mini ice age around 2030, . Humans don’t do well during global cooling, it’s far more dangerous. Humans actually do much better during global warming. A simple fact lost on Al Gore followers.

Soft Sigh from Hell November 4, 2015 at 6:41 pm

The dim deniers don’t realize that no matter which way it goes, people in some big chunks of the world get hurt. Just different parts presumably.

nitrat November 5, 2015 at 8:24 am

Tell it to the Native Americans who island homes are being inundated by rising oceans or sinking into the melting permafrost.


Leave a Comment