Leo

You call your reference evidence that pulls down climate science?
It proves the point made by Robyn Williams; science presenter on ABC, that deniers keep regurgitating the same old material.
When there are cartoons of Hitler or ISIS attached to material it a sure sign that the material is political in nature.

Your reference refers to attacks on Naomi Orestes.

A real credibility matter when the Attorney General of New York State is investigating ExxonMobil for the very matters Naomi Orestes writes about.

The signed petition described is an old and tired reference that has been debunked.

Your are not able to provide any valid references to debunk the bell graphs reference. Abuse doesn't cut it. Real observations provide evidence, semantics and sophistry provide nothing.

What comments do you have about the 300 year old bridge in Britian that has been damaged by the recent floods to the extent of not being repairable?

I have told you on more than one occasion,flea that I will not answer stupid questions, and I have not noticed any outside that category emanating from you. They are stupid because they are irrelevant. You have no science to show any measurable human effect on climate, so you proceed on a basis of assuming it, after which everything you raise is irrelevant, because you have no foundation.
Do not pretend that you are too stupid to understand this. You realize that it is only your dishonesty supporting your assertions, no science, and nothing rational

You say” When there are cartoons of Hitler or ISIS attached”. Are you lying again, or just delusional?The cartoons are of totalitarian fraud promoters
The article is factual. It is not news that Oreskes is a liar. She has demonstrated that from the day she published her first disingenuous survey.
The article, as I said, is an excellent summary of the situation, and involves repetition of the truth, referred to by fraud promoters like yourself and Robyn Williams as” regurgitating the same old material.”
As mentioned on numerous previous occasions, flea, you are not fit to partake in rational discussion.

Hi Leo,
peurile? Wow, sticks and stones, man, like ouch. ;-)

In the meantime, I'd stay away from the denialista sites that stoke your anti-science fanaticism. It's reached religious level zealotry with you, hasn't it? Let's here some data from the real world:

"No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these main points. The last national or international scientific body to drop dissent was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists,[13] which in 2007[14] updated its statement to its current non-committal position.[15] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Now now, before you cry into your beer for too long, I understand. It's a scary subject, and sometimes seems hopeless. I was an anti-nuclear activist about 6 years ago. I encountered the data, and changed my mind. I now agree with Dr James Hansen that we should be building 115 reactors a year to fix this. If I changed my mind, you can to. Come on back to the real world man.

We simply don't need fossil fuels. Once we build enough waste-eating IFR's, we'll be able to manufacture enough oil alternatives to really clean up our cities and save money on the health bill!

Forbes has concluded that according to public health data, coal adds 10% health costs to most first world nations health bills and that: “These additional health costs begin to rival the total energy costs on an annual basis for the U.S.” goo.gl/pVLQjO In other words, the retail price of coal-fired electricity is only half the cost. Coal barons outsource the other half to our health bill, and tip their hats to governments for picking up the tab. On this basis, nuclear power is already cheaper than the true cost of coal.

Leo

"...When there are cartoons of Hitler or ISIS attached”. Are you lying again, or just delusional?The cartoons are of totalitarian fraud promoters"....

Your cartoon has a go at scientists caught in ice in Antarctica and the figure on the right has a statement on their T shirt "Death to Infidels" a direct reference to ISIS. Your comment is bs. Anything that purports to present serious science would not present such a cartoon.

The source of your data is Heartlands which has no scientific credibility. If you believe Heartlands you would believe anything.
They were so confident in what they are spouting that they refused entry of perceived critics to the premier of their film Climate Hustle in Paris. Anything of a scientific nature should stand up to reasonable questioning.

You left out any comment about ExxonMobil who are being investigated. Their management has recently acknowledged that anthropogenic climate change is real, and their documentation shows they funded denier groups.
Your comment in relation to this elsewhere was that ExxonMobil had been bullied into it; a transparently thin comment.

Yes, flea, you were not lying, you were just displaying your incredible ignorance.
A cartoon which draws an analogy between the authoritarian actions of the fraud promoters, and Hitler, is not a cartoon of Hitler. This aspect of the fraud promoters is well known:
Vaclav Klaus, when President of the Czech Republic: “As someone who lived under communism for most of my life I feel obliged to say that the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity at the beginning of the 21st century is not communism or its various softer variants. Communism was replaced by the threat of ambitious environmentalism.”
.
A Royal Commission would have some good witnesses:
Will Happer, Princeton University physicist, former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy: I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect....Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science.”
http://www.c3headlines.com/quotes-from-global-warming-critics-skeptics-sceptics.html
Ian Plimer has written a book, Heaven and Earth:
What Heaven And Earth sets out to do is restore a sense of scientific perspective to a debate which has been hijacked by ‘politicians, environmental activists and opportunists’. It points out, that the CO2 in the atmosphere — to which human activity contributes the tiniest fraction — is only 0.001 per cent of the total CO2 held in the oceans, surface rocks, air, soils and life; that CO2 is not a pollutant but a plant food; that the earth’s warmer periods — such as when the Romans grew grapes and citrus trees as far north as Hadrian’s Wall — were times of wealth and plenty.
Heartland cannot be criticised on the science it asserts. If you took notice of it flea you would learn some science, and cease to be a fraud supporter. You still use the scurrilous and baseless term “denier” when you have no science to deny.

" Communism was replaced by the threat of ambitious environmentalism.”"

Nah, you got that wrong. Communism was replaced by Corporatism, where corporations run the economy and pay denialist think tanks like the Heartland Institute to brainwash the gullible, like you. Denialism is your religion, communism your devil, and the free-market your almighty provider. Too bad coal kills 2.6 million people a year, actually *does* cause climate change, and will one day RUN OUT! What then, Einstein? Are you aware of the peaking in resources, and that a real economic crisis can start half way through the resource as the cheap half peaks? Ha? Anyone home? Or has the denialist faith got you wearing your tinfoil hat again?