ipsos.com — Just 43% of Americans consider that the world’s temperature has been rising slowly over the past 100 years as a result of human activity. An additional quarter of adults (24%) acknowledge these rising temperatures, but feel that natural patterns of the earth’s environment is causing this warming. In contrast, 28% are skeptical of global warming.
Dec 11, 2009 View in Crawl 4
Closed AccountDec 12, 2009
"Lord Monckton is clear and articulate. He can certainly speak for me". <a class="user" href="http://digg.com/environment/Watch_Lord_Monckton_claims_Greenhouse_gases_are_harmless?t=29850906#c29850906" rel="nofollow">http://digg.com/environment/Watch_Lord_Monckton_cl ...</a>That makes you a poor scientist, or worse.Signed, an actual scientist.No one speaks for me.
Closed AccountDec 12, 2009
How many times does greenlair have to be reported for SPAM until digg pulls the plug???
greenfyreDec 12, 2009
Actually, reporting people who post relevant links that are in context and accurate is harrassment ... keep doing it and you are the one they will actually ban.
Closed AccountDec 12, 2009
@JeremiahLaments: Hopefully he keeps posting them until you f**king shills actually RESPONDS TO A SINGLE POINT HE MAKES. All you do is sling FUD and simply ignore the mountains of evidence Greenfyre and other have presented and keep presenting.
h8f8kesDec 12, 2009
LMAO - thanks richmomz
Closed AccountDec 12, 2009
"and notice that they are different, relevant, and in context every time."They are not different. Many of your posts are word for word, exactly the same, and have been copy & pasted hundreds of times.Skeptics have had their accounts deleted for posting copy & paste replies to your copy & pastes. Their posts were also relevant and in context every time.Most of us have read your links, and recognize it as global warming alarmism. Most of your links are to biased websites such as realclimate.org or your own blog.
stonecircleDec 12, 2009
Maybe instead you should ask how many times does Seth Stuck have to be reported for using web sites to garner people's Diggs and Buries to inflate or alter Digg statistics, which is a TRUE Terms of Service violation?
Closed AccountDec 13, 2009
even mandatory illiteracy if we take digg-gaming motherships in account, less than a quarter of 28who dugg, lists not immediately as denial spore :Pdropped after joint briefing. and 28 buried you. roflgo ahead trolls, duplicate accts are one of the twoswiftest ways to riddance, beside obvious stalking.for serious diggers an amusement to imagine mindless jumping jacks hasting to bury on command, tongue out. <a class="user" href="http://digg.com/political_opinion/An_Open_Letter_to_Mike_Kaulbars_The_Guerrilla_Capitalist?t=27976776#c27977004" rel="nofollow">http://digg.com/political_opinion/An_Open_Letter_t ...</a>PS heyyy qt - heel and now you may bury again :DI deleted to add the ps, so quick you jerked to string.
drazen77Dec 14, 2009
@greenfyreI don't know where you've been but if you google "climategate", you'll have all the evidence you need.Climate scientists with a political agenda have been playing with the data and acting on a policy on intimidation and supression against their critics.That is a serious blow to their credibility. And based on the content of those emails and what has happened to the raw data... yeah.... garbage in, garbage out. That's a big poo poo on their data models.
Closed AccountDec 18, 2009
:D will repeating nonsense ever make it sense ?peer-reviewed studies say that doesn't do the trick.because it is tricking. which defines a spammer too.