so how does one go about putting real information in front of the AGW religion?

Bubba..... 'Peer Review' is broken.

In fact, in the areas of medicine and paleoclimatology, the shrill cry of "Peer Reviewed" is enough to automatically question their cause.

Nata.... you will find that a few of the Warming Alarmists (a couple of the so-called 'Top Contributors) are very sensitive to anyone who questions them. They try to pass themselves as 'scientists' but with such behavior as I have seen in this forum they are anything but.

If you get blocked, take it as a compliment. It simply means that they are in denial of the truth. They realize that they have been sucked up into a false belief based on corrupt science, but will stubbornly (because of embarrassment) not admit it.

Hang in there!

I agree.

There is no evidence of it besides the computer models used by political activists. They have to ignore the historical climate record and the fact that it simply hasn't warmed in the way they claimed it would. The warming that ended about 15 years ago was perfectly consistent with natural warming. Anything said to the contrary is anti-scientific propaganda and nothing but intentional misinformation. The data has been manipulated and distorted but even with that, the amount of actual warming is less than a degree in century. We are cooler than the Earth was a thousand years ago and much cooler than during the Holocene optimum about 5 thousand years ago. The warm times are times of prosperity. Alarmists have no basis for their propaganda and in spite of their claims of cause and effect, there is no significant and certainly not harmful effect. With no actual significant warming, their agenda is meaningless speculation.

I really feel sorry for you kids who don't understand how the propaganda your being taught in the public school system these days are going to lead to the extinction of your freedoms in the future. What you need to be doing is exploring the natural cycles of the earths climate. You'd be surprised to know that in the 70's the same politicians were trying to convince the world that we were heading for another ice age. If they ever convince you, the younger generation, that global warming is your fault then you'll never question the constitutionality of them taxing you for something nature does naturally. The same applies to social reform. Don't let them convince you that it is your obligation to provide the same standard of living to a person who won't work that you've labored feverishly to achieve.

Although I personally don't block anyone, if I were to block anyone, it would be you--you have personally lied about me in the past in your answers.

Perhaps you need to clean up your own act if you want people to unblock you.

I'm not blocking you. You can easily create your own thread, much as you did just now, with your statements concerning your belief in AGW.

All you need to do is to scientifically prove that all established heat physics and atmospheric physics are wrong, and replace these laws with new laws. How hard can that be? As ALL of the so far collected climate change data and observations by thousands of scientists in hundreds of countries fit into the currently accepted laws of heat and atmospheric physics, to disprove AGW simply disproving the laws that this data fits into would make the deniers case. If this can be done, it should be done...there's a Nobel Prize in it for someone.

Share your "real information" in a question/answer.

Hey lots of money to be made by people who are ignorant of most everything else in life, but like to tell everyone how bad everyone but them are to "environment", they go to school, neva do anything but sit in school, work for state, or company what works for feds, make lots of money doing nothing, don't produce one thing, just try to cause problems for regular people just trying to get along.

Who cares if they block you, this post for fun only, means nothing in the real world.

Well, I have never blocked anyone, if you have any "real" information lets hear it.

Perhaps you could start with what is wrong with the CO2 theory, especially the absorption and re-admission of certain wavelengths of infrared radiation and provide an alternative explanation to the increase of the downward transmission of these wavelengths from the atmosphere. This is the key question in my opinion. If you have an intelligent answer to this, I for one, would be very interested to read it!

I don't do religion by the way!

Easy. If you make a discovery, publish it in a peer-reviewed journal.

Be warned, your information has to be factual, observable, and reproducible and the way you analyze it has to be appropriate, and your conclusions derivable from the results of your analysis. Propaganda typically doesn't pass muster.

Step 1: try learning some 'real information'.

If you're just parroting a bunch of garbage you hear from Fox News and denier blogs, you're incapable of 'putting real information' in front of anyone, because you don't know what 'real information' is.

For example, in response to the question "How accurate are climate models?", you answered "The models are not based on physics."

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aj3KC...

That is just absurdly wrong. Of course climate models are based on physics. If you're going to 'answer' global warming questions without bothering to learn even the most basic climate science concepts, then you shouldn't be surprised when people block you. Nor should you pretend you're putting forth 'real information' when you're putting forth lies and misinformation.

As another example, in response to the question "What is IPCC's conclusion about Global Warming?", just 3 minutes ago, *after you asked this question*, you answered "their conclusion is : 'There is money to be made peddling a scam. OR. PT was right, there is a sucker born every minute.'"

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Apa4....

Honestly, do you think that's "real information"? Or are you lying and misinforming a person who asked a genuine sincere question?

This is a question and answer site. It's not a "here are my ignorant beliefs" site. If you don't know the answer to a question, then don't answer it. And if you continually answer questions that you have no business answering, misinforming people in the process, you shouldn't be surprised when people block you to prevent this abuse of Yahoo Answers.