Not the point, but you knew it already.
It is EXACTLY the point in response to anyone who says, “Frankly, who cares if it is a billion or a million.” I can only imagine the apoplexy with which you would greet anyone on the climate change denier side who got caught mixing up “million” and “billion” and responded thusly.
I was fooled by you for a long time. Now I see you clearly. You do a really good job of waving the “Science, first, only, and always,” flag. But here you slipped up, and revealed that your real agenda is “Science, as long as it supports my preferred outcome; otherwise, fuck it.”
Learn the history and the experiments done to confirm this after more that 100 years of research.
It is funny what they did sold.
Curiously then the commercial press told us that during the previous “pause:” of the 60-70’s that we should expect an ice age, never-mind that a super majority of scientific published papers then reported that warming was coming, they were correct yet another bit of evidence that demonstrated that indeed climate science is science.
http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/global-cooling
Both.
Orbital forcing is a factor, but not the main one, currently it is not the item driving the current increase in global warming.
And you are showing your ignorance to others, I guess you did swallow the idea from another poster that places like Skeptical Science are a bad thing to check, unfortunately what you show here is not only ignorance of the subject but ignorance on what should be a reliable source. As even conservative scientists like Barry Bickmore report, Skeptical science has to be seen as a resource to check what in heck scientists are basing their ideas.
In essence, there are lots of doubts on how the orbital forcing alone would work to warm the earth.
Again, it really looks silly when you ignore **also ** (yes, that is double ignorance there) that the neigh saying was done for more than 100 years, scientists are more convinced now about us driving the current warming.
That is nice, I did not say that, pay attention.
Nope, what you showed to all is clear, you do love to prop up straw-men to claim a stupid victory. That is the evidence that is clearly here for all to see. As it is the fact that you are doing your straw man to avoid dealing with the “not small potatoes” amounts that those organizations are using when paying for political advertisements and support for blind politicians that then lead… the blind.
For a second there, I was worried that Santa forgot to give Bricker his “liberal hypocrisy” opportunity. I’d best tidy up, Scarlett Johansson will be here any minute now…
sigh
True or false: a billion is not less than a thousand millions.
You didn’t say it. I didn’t SAY you said it. I responded to the guy who DID say it, and you stepped in to the conversation to say that it wasn’t the point.
For the current warming? Yes. Very.
Nobody is advocating that. I don’t know where you get this impression. Maybe by assuming that places like Heritage are genuine and honest in their complaints, which is more than a bit naive.
Hey guys, here’s a great idea. Let’s not let Brickhead turn this into “The Brickhead Hair-Splitting Idiocy Show”. You know, just because he posts stupid bullshit doesn’t mean you have to respond. He’s a lying shitbag who will NEVER acknowledge that what he’s doing is beside the point, because he already knows that.
True. But my answer was more fun.
To be fair, he professes to be a man of science, not a man of math. 
On the other hand, maybe his difficulty with the concepts “true” and “false”. ::shrug::
Again, you are just asking that to avoid dealing with what I really said, the OP is an exaggeration, but all that money does generate lots of influence thanks to the fellows those think thanks have, the problem here is that (and this is the real move that fools people like you) is that then they use that credit acquired elsewhere to add into the mix the real anti-science item: “Climate Science is a hoax, repeat with me my congress critter and vote accordingly”
Seeing the liability and the effect the changes that are needed will affect groups like the fossil fuel companies their investments with those think thanks are indeed less than the billion from the report, but it is dishonest IMHO that the context is ignored, all that money is not used to fight climate change indeed, but all that money makes it easy to push for influence with lobbies, paid scientists, and dunderhead politicians in their pockets. I do not think all that is related to fight climate change as the OP reports, but it is no small change and this is not news.
As usual you only demonstrate that you did not pay attention, the billion issue comes from an exaggeration of the OP, of course this is just about the fourth time I mention that.
It seems that there is an early post Christmas sale on straw. 
Again, you are only avoiding dealing then with what I did say, the billion issue was already granted on my second post before the **Bricker **show started, but is it more fun to you to claim that I was fooling you.
I applaud the holiday Riverdance you do in order to not answer Bricker’s very simple and straightforward question. Michael Flatly would be impressed.
Again, it was already pre-replied by me in an early post, and no, **Bricker **should deal with the issue that I pointed out, not one that I was not pressing about, he and you are avoiding the real issue and the ones doing the real tap dancing.
“Pre-replied”?!!!
That’s some funny shit right there. Thanks for the laugh.