Phil Hands by Phil Hands

Phil Hands

Comments (26) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, 6 months ago

    The same science that is the basis for the very internet that the science deniers will use to attempt to debunk such a cartoon!!

  2. Gresch

    Gresch GoComics PRO Member said, 6 months ago

    I have heard of Nobel Prize winners who guess the actual Theory and pointed at data that supports their position while rejecting other non-supporting data… Let’s see it happened with the discovery of the double helix of DNA… they gave Obama a peace prize, the polar ice cap completely melted, the sea levels rose, they planted a bumper crop of wheat in Serbia, the gulf stream shifted, there were at least five hurricanes this season, an iceberg sank the Love boat, dogs and cats living together….

  3. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, 6 months ago

    True science never excepts theory as law simply because of consensus. True science always sets out to disprove theories. It is by surviving the light of stringent scientific opposition that a theory can become law. The ‘toon should read “many scientists BELIEVE….” PROVE the theory to be law using the scientific method, not propaganda, or shut up and leave us alone. Stop alarming people with outlandish hypothesis based on political agendas, faulty data and cultural correctness. The left couldn’t care less about law, can we say Obamacare, the law is anything the left says it is and that can change at anytime.
    There is nothing scientific about this controversy.

  4. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, 6 months ago


    Michael Crichton

  5. ckmphipps

    ckmphipps GoComics PRO Member said, 6 months ago

    @Robert Landers

    It’s interesting how people like yourself and Phil Hands like to assign opinions to the opposition and then insult and ridicule them for that opinion. The truth of the matter is that most of us who haven’t stepped fully on the global warming bandwagon are skeptical not of the rise in temperature of the earth as much as the percentage of it that is a natural fluctuation and the percentage that is man-made. There is also the inherent danger in taking drastic steps to stop or reverse a global phenomenon when our knowledge of the consequences of any major change might unintentionally have on things. It is also entirely possible that the earth, itself, has built in mechanisms to regulate its own climate within certain boundaries. This polar vortex, for example, while certainly nothing new, has had the effect of shifting a significant amount of cooling air across a large section of normally warmer parts of the planet. That might be one of many natural reactions to temperatures rising overall.
    Naturally, you won’t take any of this into consideration because the science is settled and science never needs to make adjustments for new information or hypotheses.

  6. jmattadams

    jmattadams GoComics PRO Member said, 6 months ago

    This past Summer had much fewer days above freezing in the Arctic than normal. We had a deep freeze in Texas in early December. There was a devastating freeze in South Dakota in October. For all of those things, it’s got to be pretty darn cold in the Arctic, right? Yet, melting ice caps are the latest explanation by the climate hoaxers. Explain to me how polar ice caps can melt when the temperature is -50F! “Well you see, Matt, while surface temperatures aren’t warming, the earth’s core is…because of fracking!!! We must ban oil and gas before it’s too late for my children and polar bears.” Climate Hoaxers, making it up as they go along since the global cooling scare of the 20th Century.

  7. Enoki

    Enoki said, 6 months ago

    Some scientists think that the changing albedo of the planet is a major cause. Others say jet contrails contribute. Some say that the reduction in particulate pollution is partially to blame.
    Just because some dunderheaded dork read an article in some magazine and spouts some of it off doesn’t equal confirmation….

  8. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, 6 months ago

    A general was curious about what his auditors, accountants, and budget analysts actually provided him. He went to the accountant and asked… “What is 2+2?”
    “Approximately 2 plus approximately 2 is approximately 4 said the accountant.”
    He asked the auditor the same question.
    “Exactly 2 plus exactly 2 is exactly 4” answered the auditor.
    The General then went to the office of his Budget Analyst.
    “What is 2+2?” he asked.
    The budget analyst looked at the officer and after a moment, stood up. He went to the door and after looking up and down the hallway, closed and locked the door. Then he went to his window, looked out briefly and closed the blinds. Then he went to the chair next to the General, sat down, and in a whisper asked….
    “How much do you want it to be?”
    The science… the data, numbers, records, and computer models upon which millions if not billions of dollars have been spent in an effort to come to educated conclusions… states clearly that our climate is changing at an increasing rate. But those who feel it is too expensive to make the changes needed to slow or reverse this ever more costly pattern look at the numbers and try to tell us what they want the numbers to mean.
    The failure of the Arctic to keep the polar vortex IN the Arctic is going to cost the USA 5 Billion this week alone. NOAA says that Climate Change caused by Global Warming has changed the Arctic temps making it harder for the North Pole to keep the Vortex AT the North Pole. The satellite images show the vortex breaking up and splitting off to the south over North America and Europe.
    I always state my hope that I am just worried over nothing, but too many scientists and sources I trust continue to worry. I fear that those who deny the ever more costly effects of Climate Change are, like the Danish King who sat in his throne telling the tide to stay away from him, are going to be in over their head if they wait too long to take action.

  9. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, 6 months ago


    Data source? ‘Normal?’

    It must be ‘normal’ for the Northwest Passage to be open, and only due to better explorers that it was only found in the last few years. If the Arctic temperatures were much lower than normal and the Northwest Passage was still navigable in September, then the Northwest Passage must be navigable in all normal years, and last year it must have been much narrower than normal.

  10. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, 6 months ago


    “There’s nothing scientific about this controversy.”
    True. Because Anthropogenic Global Warming is not controversial — to the scientists who actually study it and know what they are talking about. The certainty that global warming is human-caused has been raised to 95% by climate scientists. The “controversy” is merely political, not scientific.
    The sign should read that many scientists have CONCLUDED on the basis of DATA. There’s vast amounts of data. You ignoring it does not mean it doesn’t exist. To fight the deniers, most climate scientists are even putting their data up for anyone to see.
    Check out Richard Muller’s change from prominent (and qualified) skeptic to accepting AGW. Check out
    And until you do, you are not entitled to claim that this is merely propaganda. It isn’t.

  11. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, 6 months ago


    Crichton is hardly a notable resource here, as he deliberately misrepresented what he learned about climate from a leading expert to write a propaganda piece against it.

    Also, anyone who has read Crichton should know that he is utterly anti-science.

  12. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, 6 months ago


    But the thousands of scientists who have been studying all these things — including albedo — DO think AGW is occurring.

  13. r2varney

    r2varney said, 6 months ago

    Global Warming is only measured in the backyard of idiots. The concept of “Global” escapes them.

  14. Enoki

    Enoki said, 6 months ago

    @Genome Project

    Is… That jet contrails are NOT CO2 and therefore a different potential or real cause of Climate Change.
    Each and every other potential or real cause is ignored by the Gorebal Warming bunch in favor of just the CO2 explaination. That’s my argument.

  15. ReasonsVentriloquist

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 6 months ago

    @CCNJ's say the sky is falling

    “The conclusion (global warming) isn’t fitting reality, so change the conditions to make the conclusion make sense to the ‘climate change believers’.
    People, it’s winter. It’s supposed to be cold. Stop running around screaming something about the sky falling.”
    Not exactly sure what you’re saying here.
    On the one hand you want to deny the case for global warming by saying that the nomenclature is indicative of disingenuousness.
    Then you turn about 180 and say that the winter is supposed to be cold (which it is). So the current weather doesn’t prove, nor disprove the concept of Global Climate Change.
    Disingenuous, thy name is “thewholetruth”

  16. Load the rest of the comments (11).