In response to:

Global Warming Debunked by Intelligent Design

IAdmitIAmCrazy Wrote: Aug 07, 2012 2:20 PM
Now, it's one thing what happens in the controlled environment in the laboratory and what happens in the far more complicated natural environment. There are a lot of competing factors and you have use statistical models and see which best fit the data. This involves an inevitable degree of uncertainty, which you might exploit to cast doubt on the explanation that climate change is man made. Thus, the question is: Should we continue to increase the carbon imprint because we are not 100% sure that it does have an impact? Based on the lack of 100% uncertainty, should we DENY that there is an impact? Tell me, why is it that insurance companies are so extremely concerned about climate change?

Global warming has long been used to justify burdensome regulations that increase costs, increases unemployment, increases dependency on government, and reduces our individual freedom.

Now, a recent global warming propaganda "study" says that meteorological and climate events over the last few years are so statistically rare that they must be man-made global warming.  Translation: Global warming has been debunked by science.

“The relentless, weather-gone-crazy type of heat that has blistered the United States and other parts of the world in recent years is so rare that it can't be anything but man-made global warming, says...