the/ant/has-a declared-intrest
if/global-warming=proved/he the hero/disproved=the/fool

so read/the wurds/of a fool.
final/party-guest/refusing/to go-home..<<..The Arctic,.Leo is a driver of climate;>

yes/of course/the artic[tell/me]ant]/why is there an/antar-tarktrick[cause the sun/shines\its warmth/pon them briefly/thus they retain/the g=coldness of outsr-space/get it\sun heats/only half the globe at a time/while spece cools

yes/a/lol\'driver'/but]it-self/driven/by outer\space

less/or no heat;sun.<<.over the winter time temperatures were significantly higher in Alaska and Scandinavian countries.>

while the rest of the world froze[now the snow melt as far as mexico/has smelting snow/only now melting in mid/northern/summer

<</In one of my notes I included a film clip??>

THEY WERE GREENIES/SELLING WIND-POWER[IE PAID ADVERT]

<<.The comment/the snow was becoming soft..>

oh dear light fluffy snow/not icy sleet/THIS TIME
BUT THEN ANT BRAINS/GETS CUTE.<<.and instead of being able to walk over crisp snow reindeer were sinking into it.[THUS SCRAPING IT AWAY EASIER THAN SLEET/SHEET-ICE[YOU GREEN LICE]

<<>and the view was that reindeer farming*.might not be possible in the future.>

oh deer/no farming/because educated kids got better things to do/like work for greenies making movies/instead of following deer in the sleet

well go figuremovies are such a source for science info
opinion/wet feet=no nmore deer farming ever[the dear deer arnt extinct/but lol wet smow/out gone/move on[only those living past glories live on

Here is the/blIzzard/of.=oz/
]be-CAUSE....clip again:

<<.Siberia shows that they have had significant wild fires there in>

damm greenies

<<.the fires had fronts..ranging from 3 to 34 miles.>>

the legths some will GO/HOW MANY SEED-fire'S THEY DID SOW
ALL THAT BURNING/OF WET SLUSHY SNOW.wow ant way/to/blow.

its funnt ant/your talking about gloBAL warNING yet its reindeer and snow jobs

<<Please provide support..for the myth>

please supply science fact/not just every fire/wind/storm/freeze/or thaw

science aNT
<</.the trend has been of them increasing.>>

PRESENT PROOF/ITS REFUTED/THE NUMBERS ARE POLUTED[READ ADJUSTED]\

CLEARLY ANTS/NEVER LEARN/THE LAW/OF ENERGy CONSERVATION
[HEAT IS TAKEN/IN..OR GIVEN OUT[IE SNOW MELTS CAUSE ITS TAKING HEAT IN

OR IS IT COLD IS GIVEN OUT?

Dont shout<<> Permafrost melting equals warmth.>>

you saying so/dont proof nuthin

here comes a hot/front.<<>Over the last days there have been temperatures above 24C lately in some Canadian towns which is a temperature that is rarely passed. These Canadian towns are an indication of the trend Professor Lesack has written about>

lol

did he name these SPECIFIC/towns[in canada]?

<<>methane being vented...In earlier writings about methane it was being vented in ponds,>

interesting/my council/is draining every swamp[not warming/doing-it/but\council

<<.methane being vented in a diametre of a kilometer; today I found it is being vented in a diameter of 150 kilometers off Siberia.>>

ok/how\much frakking methane/leakage/over the lat ten years/its trippled/yet syill we got melting snow/not icy sleet..i/prefer my snow[soft]

<<>It is warmth>>

from what/dear-ant?

from the oceons of frozen methane on the sea floors/ready to rise up/to set the seas on fire[see the brning seas signs/of end times/studied methane/you mus know of the sea methane danger/and your expetease/yet silence/we arnt the danger/if you gree energuy seeking alarmists trying to safly harvest the sea floor methne

ant/hill/quote<<.. Australia/bushfires......is having a further impact on the nature of bushfires..>

yes i seen/their fruits/locally
they burn-off vast acerages/of forrest/each forest charing the itter/ready to ignte hotter next time/a traditional/bush fire is a flash fire/smokey fires are bad burns/BURNT BY IGNORANT FOOLS[AFTER A BURN/GO CLEAN/UP THE XCHARCOLE/in chunks or arround the roots/so much idiocy re burning/but what you saying=nothing so far

<<.Climate change intensifies bushfire/wildfire conditions.>

no idiots thinking its just set and burn=is
these things must be planed/fast/clean.over in a flash

<<.In January 2014,there were two wildfires in heathlandin Norway>

oh/no.the sky is falling[it wasnt campers/nor greenies/nor lighteningstrike[STIKE/ME PINK]

<<>Over the years the fire season has been happening earlier and earlier.>>

YES GO LOOK AT THE LITTER BEFORE/SEE THE LITTER AFTER[ITS NOT A FIREPLACE/ITS FOR NEW LIFE[IM GOING TO PHOT SOME SHOTS FOR YOU[do you have a site i can post/the pictures//its tradjic/the ignorance/globaly

<<Nobody denies Leo the major weather conditions in the past>>

.<<..There has been a warming trend happening over decades.
https://weather.gc.ca/data/analysis/351_100.gif

Investigate what the map means Leo.

THEN/BULLSHHH IT.<<You claim that climate change is a fraud>

FORGET NAME-CALLING/WHAT ARE YOU SAYING/NOT presuming leo-to/say?

>?/Hint the temperatures shown are a real worry.

<<.Monckton/the information he provides/he beat/all-gore.in court with-it
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html
PLEASE GET EDUCATED
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/fallacies.html
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/enron-2-0-wall-street-wants-manipulate-state-energy-markets-just-like-manipulates-every-market.html

ant/minds//prophetic-utterance.<<as reliable as Red Flag as a source, an extreme left wing group..Science is neither left wing nor right wing..in the information provided.>]provided/their using real numbers]and not biased as to end fruit/rewards/or\pay-off/fame/FORTUNE;for one resuklt/over]other

Leo you keep demanding definitive proof that human activities are affecting the climate.

This is on a par with demanding proof that chemistry or mathematics is correct. We know they are substantial correct simply because they work. Climate science is no different. The weather forecast is usually correct for the next day and often is right several days out. A weather forecast uses the same principles to establish surface temperatures as do the scientists who warn us about the consequences of adding excessive amounts of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

The only way it is possible to provide the proof you seek is to compare identical earths, one with added GHGs and one without, the best we can do is to look at the past history of the earth, which strongly suggests that the level of GHGs particularly CO2 influence surface temperatures.

It is clear that global surface temperatures have risen since the 1970s the question is why? so far the only satisfactory explanation is some sort of change to the atmosphere or oceans. The only global change we know of is the addition of GHGs to the atmosphere which also is the result predicted by climate science.

Sad to say the only fraud being committed is by those who seek to deliberately mislead people, because it is a huge financial risk to their business interests.

Leo, you say "As to cessation of global warming, the Satellite temperature record shows no warming for 17 years 6 months as at February 2014."

How does this reference fit in with what you say:

http://www.usnews.com/news/science/news/articles/2014/06/23/heat-repeat-globe-breaks-may-temperature-record

Quote: "The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Monday said May's average temperature on Earth of 59.93 degrees Fahrenheit (15.54 degrees Celsius) beat the old record set four years ago. In April, the globe tied the 2010 record for that month. Records go back to 1880." Its from Associated Press, just reporting facts.
There are many more newspaper reports that say much the same thing.

You have clarified your problem, warmair. You have great gaps in your education. An educated person has seen the proofs of chemistry and mathematics during their schooling. You somehow missed this, which explains your confused state now. You believe that scientific proof is not necessary for scientific assertions. You are the generic fraud-backer. When asked for proof of your baseless assertions, you come up with this ridiculous analogy, of no validity whatsoever. What is not proved in mathematics is axiomatic, from which everything else is provable.
There is nothing axiomatic in the fraud-backers’ assertion about climate change. It requires scientific proof, or it is baseless. Chemistry is proved by experiment and observation.
Observation of reality, in relation to the fraud-backers assertions proves them wrong. At a time of increase in the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere, global warming has stopped. This is the opposite of the effect asserted by fraud-backers like yourself.
When you have no science to support your assertions, I suppose you have to try something, even though you make a bigger fool of yourself in so doing.