UNSKEWED GRAPH: Scientists split on climate change

Scientists split on climate change

Scientists split on climate change

As a public service, we have created this graph to illustrate the virtual dead heat between scientists who accept climate change as a theory, and those who do not accept it.

There have been a number of articles recently that have presented this same data, but with very biased graphs that seem to suggest that scientists almost all believe in climate change.

In order to counter this propaganda, we advise you to begin disseminating the above graph immediately.  As you can see, it accurately represents the conservative view that both sides are pretty much the same.

If anyone suggests anything else, well that must just be liberal bias!!


graph data source: TheContributor.com

related articles:
Federal Spending Graph: UNSKEWED!,
There are two sides to every story, and one of them is socialist.

The GOP applauds the New England Blizzard for not giving in to “global warming”

Belief in climate change by party and temperature


Belief in climate change by party and temperature

In honor of blizzard “Nemo”, which buried New England under feet of snow this past weekend, we are ready to reveal a new GOP strategy to win over independent voters: MORE BLIZZARDS.

The above graph, recently published in the research journal “Climate and Society”, tells you everything you need to know. It shows how people who identify with different political parties (Democrat, Republican, and Independent) are affected by unusual changes in temperature. The basic findings of the study are as follows:

1) Republicans are always right: they have a very low probability of believing in climate change, no matter what the temperature is outside. Good for them.

2) Democrats are always wrong: they have a very high probability of believing in climate change, no matter what the temperature is outside.  Obviously that means they have been indoctrinated and are so ideologically skewed that nothing will change their minds.

3) Independents believe in climate change when it is warm outside, and do not believe in climate change when it’s cold outside.


Following the release of this study, the GOP has announced a new plank in the Republican Party Platform: Republicans are now officially “Pro-Winter Storm”!

For the sake of conservatism and the Republican party, we therefore would like to propose that from now on Presidential Elections only be held on the days of or immediately following really bad winter storms.


After all, just look at the graph above: the numbers make is clear that high temperatures just lead to liberal bias!!!


graph data source: Hamilton & Stampone in Weather, Climate and Society (2013)
graph found via: ScienceDaily.com

Temperature anomalies have a liberal bias!

Liberal temperature anomalies

This left-wing propaganda chart seems to imply that this year is one of the hottest years since 1895. But that can’t be right, because some guy at Forbes magazine said the world is cooling!

According to this graph, January through July of this year was the warmest first seven months of any year on record for the United States. The national temperature of 56.4°F was 4.3°F above the long-term average. Most of the contiguous U.S. was record and near-record warm for the seven-month period, except the Pacific Northwest.


How do I know?

Because Peter Ferrara told me.

Who is Peter Ferrara, you may ask? Is he some notable climate scientist? No, but even better: he’s the Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy for the Heartland Institute. And he wrote an article for Forbes magazine.

The title of this article is, “Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling.” So basically, you can stop reading right there. The earth is cooling, which totally disproves the above graph. Case closed.

But if you did bother to read further in the article, you would find that he attended a conference where lots of serious people said serious things, and one of the people presenting at this conference predicted that we are now in the middle of a 25-year cyclical cooling period. He makes dire predictions that it could get REALLY cold, in fact, over the next 10-15 years. You just wait.

You will also be impressed by the fact that Peter Ferrara spends a lot of time talking about how scientific and objective and not like partisan political hacks any of the people at these conferences are. You know he can recognize partisan political hacks when he sees them, because when you look over his history of contributions to Forbes Magazine you get things like:

Obama’s Real Unemployment Rate Is 14.7%, And A Recession’s On The Way
Obama Is The Biggest Spender In World History
There’s No Mystery To Slow Economic Growth: Progressives Are The Problem
Why the Supreme Court Will Strike Down All of Obamacare

Clearly this is a man who is not only unbiased, but is also correct about everything.

So I leave you with this question: which would you rather believe? The above chart created from government data? Or Peter Ferrara, the obviously neutral and unbiased non-scientist who attended a conference recently?

I know who I trust. How about you?

graph source: National Climactic Data Center

Sneaky climate chart uses numbers to lie!

Biased Climate Change Chart

This chart severely misrepresents the ambiguity of the Global Warming debate. By relying on liberally biased “numbers”, it fails to represent the basic principle of fairness: there are two sides to every story.

This chart is being spread on Facebook and through other liberal social media conduits. It divides the circle into two pieces: one piece represents people who believe in the fallacy of global warming (black) and the other piece represents the people who correctly reject the discredited theory of global warming (red). By nefariously making the surface area of each piece proportional to the number of studies supporting each position, it gives the overall impression that there is overwhelming support for the climate change lie.

In fact, by looking at this graph, one might even get the impression that people who deny climate change are just a sad, tiny little fringe cadre of whack-a-doodle extremists pathetically trying to get some attention by catering to ignorant people.

But that interpretation is obviously nonsense!!

The only conclusion, therefore, is that the graph must be wrong. This graph is simply unfair to climate change deniers.  And don’t liberals say they like fairness?

Unbiased climate change chartWe at LiberalBias.com have decided to provide for you the unskewed version of this same graph. Notice that this graph more correctly represents the fact that there are two sides to this story, and nobody can really know for sure what the right answer is. This graph shows the fair and balanced version of the debate.

Notice that we are not lying about any of the numbers, per se. We point out that 24 papers reject global warming. But we have adjusted the area of each section of the graph to correctly get across the correct feeling of the debate, namely: there are two sides to every story, and we’ll have to leave it there.

We will not allow our graphs to be dictated by numbers and statistics!

After all, if we did that, it would inevitably lead to liberal bias!!


graph data source: “The State of Climate Science: A Thorough Review of the Scientific Literature on Global Warming” by Dr. James Powell
graph found via: The “I fucking love science” Facebook Page

There are two sides to every story, and one of them is socialist.

Conservative Graph

When science says that Fox News is biased, there is only one obvious and correct response: “Nuh uh… you are!”

Liberals like to make fun of conservatives for being “anti-science” and unfortunately a lot of conservatives fall for this trick, and get all squeamish and apologize or deny that they are anti-science. The fact is, if you are a real conservative, you should stand up and be proudly anti-science.

Science explicitly and unashamedly does not take values into consideration when evaluating theories. Science is tyrannical about rejecting theories that do not fit data, no matter how much those theories might make intuitive sense or be based on moral wisdom. Science is elitist and scoffs at anything that it doesn’t consider “real data”. Why can’t Christian Values also be considered data, huh? Stupid tyrannical scientists.

There is no reason to think that being anti-Science is a bad thing. The only reason people in our society have been brainwashed into accepting that science is good is because of the moral decay and insidious propaganda of the left wing.

According to science, when there are two sides to a story, one of them is right and the other is wrong.

According to conservatives, when there are two sides to a story, one of them is Right and the other is socialist!

And that is why science itself has a permanent and unavoidable liberal bias!!!


graph found via: scientificamerican.com (altered by LiberalBias.com to remove all the bias)