Over 59604

Scientists Politics

This guy -

TAGS: democrat scientists no qualification needed other than being liberal
Rating: 5/5

More politifakes by OTC

OTC - June 7, 2014, 10:35 pm
'Don't buy a mansion on the coast like I did because I said sea levels are going to rise 20ft'
EmmaRoydes - June 7, 2014, 4:02 pm
"do like I say, not like I do"

First scientists were wrong about butter -

TAGS: scientists are not infallible
Rating: 4.64/5

More politifakes by OTC

OTC - July 11, 2014, 1:31 am
Like people not understanding the difference between old and new testaments?
fauxnews - July 5, 2014, 6:13 pm
...just like there is always a chance you could win a $1000 in the lottery. But, again, probability might make you rethink your decision in how to spend your time and $$$ (when taking into account this example).
fauxnews - July 5, 2014, 6:12 pm
And,so far,there has been no REAL evidence to disprove the theory about man-made climate change. The theory so far stands.If you'd like, throw out some arguments against, and I will show you the data.But, yes, there is always a chance it could be wrong...
fauxnews - July 5, 2014, 6:10 pm
That right there is where you screwed up. You never NEVER conclusively prove anything when you get down to it. That's why even atoms are still referred to as atomic theory.But so far,it's probability for truth is high.Why?No evidence so far to disprove it
Curlyrocks - July 5, 2014, 6:08 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhtITYmL9a0 (my favorite episode)
Curlyrocks - July 5, 2014, 6:02 pm
argument needs to learn more about the scientific method than ours.
Curlyrocks - July 5, 2014, 6:02 pm
have been SCIENTIFICALLY proven using the most basic element of the scientific method, cause and effect. He was mocked about his science for saying the truth. You can't and never will prove man made CO2 is causing global warming. Your side of this .......
Curlyrocks - July 5, 2014, 5:58 pm
ok terror you stoped me from my 1st rant, but you started a whole new one. a few days ago there was a poster mocking a man who said that there was a problem with fine particulates, NO(X), SO(X) and other REAL problems with the environment that can and ...
OTC - July 4, 2014, 9:54 pm
Thanks m8
fauxnews - July 4, 2014, 5:33 pm
Well…Happy B-day nevertheless. :-)
OTC - July 4, 2014, 4:38 pm
No, but close
fauxnews - July 4, 2014, 12:02 pm
Happy Bday, OTC! :-) You were born on the 4th?
OTC - July 4, 2014, 8:51 am
Some people are deaf and blind
Zeitguy - July 3, 2014, 11:31 pm
OTC, Your point is loud and clear .
OTC - July 3, 2014, 9:49 pm
Thanks for proving my point
foxrecon19d - July 3, 2014, 9:47 pm
unless, of course, the examples of fraud are actually your own talking points
fauxnews - July 3, 2014, 8:31 pm
People who don't get that basic point lose the argument before they even open their mouths. Well said...
fauxnews - July 3, 2014, 8:30 pm
Exactly TA. Science isn't wrong. Just people. Especially those that don't understand or respect the scientific method. Certainly those who think fallacies, superstition, and religious emotion are suitable refutations against scientific data.
terroraustralis - July 3, 2014, 8:19 pm
and when people take examples of frauds being caught, and claim them to be proof that science is wrong, it pisses me off, because its proof that they have no f***ing idea what they're talking about, and yet people will believe them.
terroraustralis - July 3, 2014, 8:18 pm
this isnt about global warming, its about people not understanding the scientific method. frauds being discovered and theories being disproven is how we know science is working, because the frauds are being caught.
fauxnews - July 3, 2014, 6:25 pm
Curlyrocks - July 3, 2014, 6:23 pm
Terror please don't tempt me to start the whole comparison rant on GW vs religion. Like everything else to do with GW no one changes their opinion and everyone gets p!ssed off when I go off.
terroraustralis - July 3, 2014, 4:52 pm
"first god wrote the old testament, and was wrong about everything, so he wrote the new testament, so he must be wrong this time too!" - OTC logic in action
Zeitguy - July 3, 2014, 3:26 pm
The "they" you speak of is science. And the only goal of science is to further refine theories by way of repeatable experimentation and deductive reasoning. Your poster is a great example of a logical fallacy.


TAGS: worshipping global warming scientists
Rating: 4.5/5

More politifakes by foxrecon19d

crankyhead - August 26, 2014, 5:28 pm
Hate to break it to you OTC, but the word 'consensus' does not mean, what you think it means.
foxrecon19d - August 7, 2014, 11:50 pm
Face it lug-nut. If you aren't asking Al Gore why he bought a mansion next to the ocean after he preached that the ocean levels will rise above New York City, then you just admitted that your political rhetoric is your 'science'
Zeitguy - August 7, 2014, 5:25 pm
Faux is right on the mark. Nicely explained.
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 5:07 pm
Oh,I did. I re-read it.Twice. Yup, I was being sarcastic.So dont read too deeply into that.You're telling yourself a story on that.I gave you a thoughtful response about my serious feelings on that matter. Work with that. Or choose to hear what you want.
EmmaRoydes - August 7, 2014, 4:49 pm
I guess you didn't even read your comment #69798 where you stated "the consensus of junk pseudo-scientists and non-reputable faux-scientist have your back on that one"
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 4:44 pm
...so also the scientist does sometimes lose their bet. But neither scientists, nor casino owners lose nearly so often as do the gamblers who enter the casino.Right or wrong isn't the debate here.Probability is.That's the argument I want to have.Nuff said
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 4:39 pm
Scientists always play the role of the Casino owner. Betting with the odds instead of against them. And because they do this they are much more often right than they are wrong. However, just as the Casino owner does sometimes lose their bet...
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 4:38 pm
...and then submit arguments showing that the thing science never said is in fact false.Thereby making scientists seem very foolish for having supposedly said this thing which they never said.
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 4:37 pm
Science is about "balance of probabilities".It tells you what is most probably true.Never attempts to tell you what is certainly true.Theologians commit the"straw man"fallacy,attempting to argue that science has claimed something science never claimed...
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 4:31 pm
...but, hey, stranger things have happened,right? And, trust me, on this debate I would be more than happy to be wrong. I don't want to be 'right' about calamity. No good scientist (or science minded person would.)Are deniers this generous w/their stance?
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 4:30 pm
??? I 'never' claimed that. :-/ That's a story you are telling yourself, mate. I used the word "consensus" for a reason. I fully concede there is a chance I could be wrong, however remote that chance is based upon the compelling data...
EmmaRoydes - August 7, 2014, 4:23 pm
See your comment #69798. You always manage to claim that any scientist who doesn't buy the global warming alarmist view is a junk scientist or a quack. e.g. "My scientists are better than your scientists"
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 3:25 pm
No, mate, that's your shtick. ;-) I never said science is infallible. Science never claims to be infallible. Not "real" science, anyways. That's what Religion does.
Zeitguy - August 7, 2014, 2:30 pm
It's more like science vs your political rhetoric.
EmmaRoydes - August 7, 2014, 2:18 pm
Are you still on that "My scientists are better than your scientists" schtick?
EmmaRoydes - August 7, 2014, 2:17 pm
Nope, 1985 has already come and gone.
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 2:13 pm
Which "consensus" are you using to arrive at that conclusion, OTC? lol... You're right, OTC, the consensus of junk pseudo-scientists and non-reputable faux-scientist have your back on that one....and bigfoot... and Elvis. Mercy! X-D
OTC - August 7, 2014, 1:18 pm
Actually Fox, considering its from FN i thought that was a good rebu.ttal. did you really expect anything else?
Curlyrocks - August 7, 2014, 12:30 pm
That one may still come true, since the main plan is to use nuclear power to stop releasing CO2 but keep up with this life style of consumption we have, there are going to be a lot more Fukushima type disasters before we figure this out.
EmmaRoydes - August 7, 2014, 8:31 am
EmmaRoydes - August 7, 2014, 8:30 am
In 1970, the "scientific community" also claimed that we would have to wear gas masks to breath by 1985.
foxrecon19d - August 7, 2014, 6:44 am
"Typical uneducated response. Use of an exaggeration to totally negate his obvious lack of evidence from the left-wing liberal 'scientific community' which says you should be able to SWIM up the Empire State Building by now. Would expect nothing less."
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 3:07 am
...available now in stores where you can find Pet Rocks and other fine companionship products!
fauxnews - August 7, 2014, 3:05 am
OTC said,"There are 2 sides to every issue, yet some people want to attack others who bring an opposing scientific consensus to their beliefs of what their scientific consensus says about..." From the hit Album "STUPID S'HIT SAID BY 'MURICANS VOL.4"...
OTC - August 7, 2014, 1:04 am
There are 2 sides to every issue, yet some people want to attack others who bring an opposing scientific consensus to their beliefs of what their scientific consensus says about GW
foxrecon19d - August 6, 2014, 11:32 pm
Actually, Zeit, a left-wing liberal Democrat'professor' taught me science. She claimed that by the year 2000, 80% of the world' food would be gone and that half of the world's surface would be uninhabitable.
foxrecon19d - August 6, 2014, 11:29 pm
If you are going to wave the Global Warming Banner, Zeit, you should at least know what you are talking about. That you are totally ignorant of the fact that the people you call 'scientists' claimed New York would be under water by 2000 says a lot...
Zeitguy - August 6, 2014, 9:47 pm
That's what happens when you let the GOP teach you science.
Zeitguy - August 6, 2014, 9:20 pm
Typical uneducated response. Use of an exaggeration to totally negate what is common knowledge in the scientific community. Would expect nothing less.
foxrecon19d - August 6, 2014, 1:37 pm
Your 'scientific consensus' says New York is under 30 feet of water. Now, how about telling everyone what that has to do with 'reflecting political views..."
Zeitguy - August 6, 2014, 10:18 am
Always amazed at the ignorant dismissal of scientific consensus because it doesn't reflect your political views.

National Science Foundation -

Eco-Fascism: Global Warming Junk Scientists Want Obama to Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics -

TAGS: eco fascism global warming junk scientists climate change hoax scam ipcc al gore rico warmists alarmists greenies green tyranny gia mother earth hysterians agenda 21
Rating: 5/5

More politifakes by TheConservativeInsurgent

ipaprime - September 20, 2015, 4:29 am
little o won't do it cause then the MMCC crowd wil have to explain why their data was manipulate, their models haven't been correct, and all those other pesky problems they are having proving their point.

Warmist Buffoonery -

UN Climate Scientists WRONG AGAIN -

Junk Scientists Claim Hurricane Drought Is Just “Dumb Luck” -

Another Scary Fable From Global Warming Junk Scientists -

not junk science, activist science -

imagine that -

The Church of Gaia is Teaming Up With the Church of Scientology -

Activist scientists tried to ban this pesticide by drawing a conclusion before doing the research -

3 trillion trees on earth astounds scientists -

a private club of like-minded researchers who publish articles citing each other and recommending each other to peer review their papers. A good example of how they promote themselves (amongst themselves) -

TAGS: activist among scientists climate change agenda
Rating: 4.27/5

More politifakes by OTC

rebeccaolsen - April 17, 2015, 12:51 pm
OTC, you're not going to catch that wascally wabbit (aka.science) as long as you fail to acknowledge that your prey is heads and shoulders smarter than you. You're giving Looney Tunes new meaning hun. Emphasis on the word Looney. Too funny. Bugs FTW :)
rebeccaolsen - April 17, 2015, 12:47 pm
I love how OTC is quickly becoming the resident Pete Puma around here - religiously trying to pass tired,all ready,debunked denier positions, one after the other,like Puma's bad disguises trying to trick Bugs Bunny :) www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGns_QEUPTw
rebeccaolsen - April 17, 2015, 12:41 pm
-which were exposed as ALL hosted at the same IP address, the same as the ICSC site, ALL sharing the same single Internet service provider. So great poster OTC. You're right. Fake scientists - like the deniers - are just activists :)
rebeccaolsen - April 17, 2015, 12:39 pm
It's not like, say, when OTC tried to pass off fraudent information this week from the ICSC - an pseudo organization that falsifies a website and purposefully tries to disguise their agenda as peer-reviewed by inventing multiple websites-
rebeccaolsen - April 17, 2015, 12:37 pm
That's what I thought too :) The only activist scientists doing this are the denier junk scientists since this can't mean TRUE peer-reviewed studies, hence the words, PEER-REVIEWED. It's public fact - vetted outside as well as within the science community
Zeitguy - April 17, 2015, 12:32 pm
I a**ume you're referring to the pseudo-science of MMGW denial. Good poster.

fraudulent science -

infallible scientists -