The scientist who has been put in charge of the Commerce Department’s new climate change office is coming under attack from both sides of the global warming debate over his handling of what they say is contradictory scientific data related to the subject.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/22/tom-karl-tried-to-suppress-data-critics-charge/

Never argue with an idiot. They will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

You’re letting Amen Chorus Angel get to you. You’re playing by his rules. It’s axiomatic that an intelligent person loses when he tries to argue intelligently with Birthers, Truthers, & here Earthers. Fuhgedaboudit.

Don’t you know that everything proves AGW, OOPS, Climate Change?

Colder weather then usual = AGW
Hotter weather than usual = AGW
Usual weather = AGW (woudda been cooler but for AGW, ya see)

More hurricanes than usual = AGW
Fewer hurricanes than usual= AGW
Same hurricanes as usual = AGW (woudda been more/less – pick one – neither answer is wrong – but for AGW, ya see)

More snow than usual = AGW
Fewer snow than usual= AGW
Same snow as usual = AGW (woudda been more/less – pick one – neither answer is wrong – but for AGW, ya see)

More Algore than usual = AGW
Less Algore than usual = AGW
Same Algore as usual = AGW

You getting this?

“Have you heard, it’s in the stars.
Next July we collide with Mars…”

said Cole Porter, & you can’t disprove him either.

Just to humor you I began the process you demanded of us here. I took your accusations in order results are recorded below from a standard Google search for the actual phrase you authored.

The dolphins are poisoned,
Top eight results
Nerdfighters.ning.com
Salon.com
Encyclopedia.com
Wwf.or.th
The petitionsite.com
http://www.seashepard.com
animaldiversity.com
http://www.dolphinspirit.org

penguins are disappearing,
Top eight results
http://www.penguinescience.com
http://www.wildlifeextra.com
http://www.telegraph.co.uk
theScotsman.scotsman.com
kirkoftheartic
penguinesland.blogspot
http://www.penguine.com
http://www.abc.net (This one for the movie March of the Penguines)

I’ve only been through 17% of your list and have yet to find a single substantiation from ANY objective web site. ZERO. Even if I call abc objective, the reference was to a movie and not a penguine’s plight. Since I do work for a living, and the results of this search so far yield no useable results; I’ll cease this futile mission and allow you to do your own heavy lifting. K? K.

Patently ridiculous! In your previous post on Feb 22nd @ 6:27 PM you made twelve, count’em twelve, completely unsubstantiated claims without a single shred of objective evidence or reference to back up any of them. And notice I said objective; we don’t settle for links to such bogus organizations as Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, East Anglican University, NASA, the IPCC, the UN, or the NOAA since they’ve already proven themselves woefully unreliable and totally ‘in-the-tank’ for the AGW crowd.

That’s not how it works here dear. You provide objective evidence and we concur or disagree. That’s how real debate works outside of progressive circles. We’ll forgive your naïveté this time as you’re probably a little out of your depth here. First time attempting to engage in conversation with someone that doesn’t totally agree with all your positions, huh?

No one gets away with spewing out emotional statements and, in the same breath, demanding that everyone drop whatever else their doing and either prove you wrong or elevate your drivel to the category of ‘unassailable’.

I understand that’s how it works at the Huffington Post and Moveon.org; but that kind of play here collects nothing but derision; as well it should.

We don’t have to prove you wrong; it is you that have to provide objective evidence that your point is correct.

Lot’sa luck with that!