Deniers! Anthropogenic Global Warming Skepticism deniers!

It’s not often that one has an opportunity to introduce a scholarly article on a matter of great scientific and political moment here in what is normally my self-entertainment corner of Missy’s sandbox (What? Yeah, prob’ly is a good thing.); but today we are privileged to have with us a guest lecturer who has risked his career gathering forbidden and heretical tomes on a subject that has been officially pronounced non-existent by those beholden to massive funding by Big-AGW™ power-brokerages around the world. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I refer to that distinguished compendium of scholarly, peer-reviewed scientific papers which support the skeptical view of AGW.

You know …

So, without further ado, I give you The Article. Big Porch Minkee™ welcome, now! Anyone? Beuller?

Okay, those of you who just came to occupy The Porch™ in protest, I suggest doing so in the cafeteria rather than the vending-machine area. Just sayin’.

You realize that there are something like two or three thousand studies all of which concur which have been peer reviewed, and not one of the studies dissenting has been peer reviewed? [If by "not one" you mean "over 900" then yeah. - ed.]

- John Kerry, traitor and winner of the gold medal in the medal-toss (later disqualified for cheating)

There was a massive study of every scientific article in a peer reviewed article written on global warming in the last ten years. They took a big sample of 10 percent, 928 articles. And you know the number of those that disagreed with the scientific consensus that we’re causing global warming and that is a serious problem out of the 928: Zero. ['Scuse me, Al. You missed over 900, and your book and movie are sold in the Fiction section, now. - ed.]

— Al Gore, poster-boy for celebrity-approved pseudo-scientific religioniness and state-sponsored bandwagonry in pursuit of global governance

It also gives me great pleasure to award today’s Trofie to …
John Kerry and Al Gore!

via SoylentGreen


  1. mojo
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 11:21 am |

    Define “peer” for me.

  2. joe
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 11:37 am |

    Well Mr. Charles Manson is in agreement with Gore and Kerry. Guess that about seals the deal.

  3. DougM
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 1:14 pm |

    In AGW-speak, peer means someone who believes in AGW and is willing to enforce AGW dogma.
    The reason a lot of early skeptical papers didn’t see the light of day was due to peer review by this kind of peer — one who would pee on it, a peeer.

  4. Colonel Jerry USMC
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 2:08 pm |

    Where other people`s money is involved, 1×10 to USA Debt power, will not offset
    the Shyster alGore`s driven attempt to prove to himself that he did not lose the presidential election as a result of his, rather small, flat, peter!

    Only when $$$$ prove no remedy for a Stiffy, will Albert finally *lose it*……..

  5. Posted April 18, 2011 at 3:19 pm |

    Aha! Glad to see the Bullshit Frogs are making the rounds. They are so eloquent.

  6. Posted April 18, 2011 at 3:28 pm |

    Oh, and Doug, thanks for playing along in the contest–so far yours is the only submission. Awesome–here is your lovely parting gift:

  7. Lord of the Fleas
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 3:36 pm |

    Is witch-burning carbon-neutral?

  8. SherryM
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 5:09 pm |

    I so can not stand greeneys and there global cooling global warming climate change. Hello ever hear about all the ice ages before people was here? And wasn’t there something about a “mini ice age” during the middle ages that we started coming out of right before the start of the industrial revulsion?

  9. DougM
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 6:32 pm |

    Thanks, SG (5&6)
    That’s goin’ next to my SteamPunk Sarah.
    I hope the citation at the bottom of the post is good enough to cover the cartoon, too. Not sure how that works. It’s why I watermark all my stuff.

    For those who don’t know what Soylent Green’s yammerin’ on about, wander over here (my submission @ 8/18 5:58).

  10. Merovign
    Posted April 18, 2011 at 10:54 pm |

    Making a computer model so that it uses the assumptions you choose to confirm the conclusions you desire isn’t technically “science.”

  11. ZZMike
    Posted April 19, 2011 at 3:47 pm |

    Globular Warming. Maybe even Globular Worming.

    Speaking of cases of nuts [nutcases], this just in from the U.N.:

    UN document would give ‘Mother Earth’ same rights as humans

    “UNITED NATIONS — Bolivia will this month table a draft United Nations treaty giving “Mother Earth” the same rights as humans — having just passed a domestic law that does the same for bugs, trees and all other natural things in the South American country.

    The bid aims to have the UN recognize the Earth as a living entity that humans have sought to “dominate and exploit” — to the point that the “well-being and existence of many beings” is now threatened.”

    Do we need any more evidence that the U.N. has become Bedlam?