Arctic ice thins dramatically

[FactFinder]

and what is vacuous? and who judges the standard? Is there one more prevalent than another? Who is the judge?

Seems this whole matter of Global Warming, AGW or whatever you want to call it has become some judgment call. Should I be the judge? Should Al Gore? Should Hansen be the judge. Hmm, what a conundrum! Who may be the fair judge since facts are wanting?

Is the whole really of any import anyway or are some trying to to elevate themselves above us poor lowly classes with some unnecessary cause?

 

[gslack]

and what is vacuous? and who judges the standard? Is there one more prevalent than another? Who is the judge?

Seems this whole matter of Global Warming, AGW or whatever you want to call it has become some judgment call. Should I be the judge? Should Al Gore? Should Hansen be the judge. Hmm, what a conundrum! Who may be the fair judge since facts are wanting?

Is the whole really of any import anyway or are some trying to to elevate themselves above us poor lowly classes with some unnecessary cause?

Vacuous = A vacuum or as it pertains here a person, like that of a vacuum, containing nothing.

That poster or clone as I like to think of him has been found on numerous times talking in circles, trying to confound his responses with deliberate verbiage that tries to give him an appearance of knowledge or even something of value to add, and being a general posturing imbecile with access to a thesaurus.

That being said I think I can judge him for myself just as anyone else can. Wes I am pretty sure from his response feels the same about him.

I think its important simply because its a deliberate fallacy pushed upon the public no matter who brings it.

 

[Meister]

and what is vacuous? and who judges the standard? Is there one more prevalent than another? Who is the judge?

Seems this whole matter of Global Warming, AGW or whatever you want to call it has become some judgment call. Should I be the judge? Should Al Gore? Should Hansen be the judge. Hmm, what a conundrum! Who may be the fair judge since facts are wanting?

Is the whole really of any import anyway or are some trying to to elevate themselves above us poor lowly classes with some unnecessary cause?

Vacuous = A vacuum or as it pertains here a person, like that of a vacuum, containing nothing.

That poster or clone as I like to think of him has been found on numerous times talking in circles, trying to confound his responses with deliberate verbiage that tries to give him an appearance of knowledge or even something of value to add, and being a general posturing imbecile with access to a thesaurus.

That being said I think I can judge him for myself just as anyone else can. Wes I am pretty sure from his response feels the same about him.

I think its important simply because its a deliberate fallacy pushed upon the public no matter who brings it.

Truer words were never spoken

 

[Trakar]

Not too sharp are ya.... YOU asked him to prove it, so the burden of disproof is on you not him. You don't ask the defendant to prove he didn't commit the crime, you ask the plaintiff to prove he did.
You made him the defendant when you asked him to prove it, which made you the plaintiff, you claim he is wrong or doubt him prove him wrong.

Go back and read the thread, but this time read for comprehension.

All I have ever asked is for those who make assertions, to support their assertions with cite or reference to compelling supportive evidences .

 

[Trakar]

and what is vacuous? and who judges the standard? Is there one more prevalent than another? Who is the judge?

Seems this whole matter of Global Warming, AGW or whatever you want to call it has become some judgment call. Should I be the judge? Should Al Gore? Should Hansen be the judge. Hmm, what a conundrum! Who may be the fair judge since facts are wanting?

Is the whole really of any import anyway or are some trying to to elevate themselves above us poor lowly classes with some unnecessary cause?

The only ones trying to make issues like AGW seem to be a "factless" choice of arbitrary position... , are those who find the experts and the facts they have spent the last century or so discovering, testing and refining, to not fit into their preferred world scheme, inconvenient truths, if you will.

If you have a pain you go to a doctor, if you don't like what the doctor tells you, you don't decide that there is no good medical answer and go to your lawyer or your mailman and ask them to see if they will give you an answer you like better,...do you?

 

[wirebender]

If you have a pain you go to a doctor, if you don't like what the doctor tells you, you don't decide that there is no good medical answer and go to your lawyer or your mailman and ask them to see if they will give you an answer you like better,...do you?

If the doctor tells me that I have a fever when my temperature is 98.6 and that may be pregnant even though I am male and have been for my whole life, or that I may have tonsilitis even though I had my tonsils taken out when I was 6, I tend to wonder if the doctor knows what he is talking about. In fact, I may grab myself a medical text or two and see if my symptoms match anything like what he is claiming is wrong with me.

When a climate scientist tells me that the surface of the earth is radiating more than twice the amount of energy it receives from the sun because of a trace gas in the atmosphere and can not descibe exactly how this may be without violating some very fundamental laws of physics, then I tend to wonder if the climate scientists either A) has a clue, or B) is saying what he is saying because someone is paying him a great deal of money to say it.

 

[Chris]

 

[westwall]

and what is vacuous? and who judges the standard? Is there one more prevalent than another? Who is the judge?

Seems this whole matter of Global Warming, AGW or whatever you want to call it has become some judgment call. Should I be the judge? Should Al Gore? Should Hansen be the judge. Hmm, what a conundrum! Who may be the fair judge since facts are wanting?

Is the whole really of any import anyway or are some trying to to elevate themselves above us poor lowly classes with some unnecessary cause?

No, it's not a "judgement call". Science observes physical events. It analyzes those events and after much thinking and verifying of facts a conclusion is reached. The conclusion is not the "truth". "Truth" is the purview of religion and spiritual thought. Science is interested in the observation of the pysical world and factually reporting what is observed. The AGW proponents stopped reporting factually years ago.

 

[gslack]

Not too sharp are ya.... YOU asked him to prove it, so the burden of disproof is on you not him. You don't ask the defendant to prove he didn't commit the crime, you ask the plaintiff to prove he did.
You made him the defendant when you asked him to prove it, which made you the plaintiff, you claim he is wrong or doubt him prove him wrong.

Go back and read the thread, but this time read for comprehension.

All I have ever asked is for those who make assertions, to support their assertions with cite or reference to compelling supportive evidences .

first I do not take orders from clones..

Second, I know that you asking him to prove he is right when you can't prove him wrong makes you a BS artist, not a very good one either...

He made an assertion you claim he is wrong so prove it if you can.

Third, "all you have ever asked?" LOL who the hell are you? Says you joined in February, I wasn't on here at the time been busy until recently. From the way you said that makes me wonder if you are a clone......

 

[ScienceRocks]

August 20th 2011 5,336,719

mins
2002 5,646,875
2003 6,032,031
2004 5,784,688
2005 5,315,156*
2006 5,781,719
2007 4,254,531*
2008 4,707,813*
2009 5,249,844*
2010 4,813,594*

 

[Trakar]

first I do not take orders from clones..

Second, I know that you asking him to prove he is right when you can't prove him wrong makes you a BS artist, not a very good one either...

He made an assertion you claim he is wrong so prove it if you can.

Third, "all you have ever asked?" LOL who the hell are you? Says you joined in February, I wasn't on here at the time been busy until recently. From the way you said that makes me wonder if you are a clone......

He made an assertion, I asked for reference or citation to evidence that compellingly supports his statement (as you noted, is the proper way of things,..."You make the claim its your job to back it up. Its a simple concept really. If you claim something, and then someones asks you to prove it, you can either prove it or not, but asking them to disprove it is lazy on your part.")

 

[Trakar]

If you have a pain you go to a doctor, if you don't like what the doctor tells you, you don't decide that there is no good medical answer and go to your lawyer or your mailman and ask them to see if they will give you an answer you like better,...do you?

If the doctor tells me that I have a fever when my temperature is 98.6 and that may be pregnant even though I am male and have been for my whole life, or that I may have tonsilitis even though I had my tonsils taken out when I was 6, I tend to wonder if the doctor knows what he is talking about. In fact, I may grab myself a medical text or two and see if my symptoms match anything like what he is claiming is wrong with me.

When a climate scientist tells me that the surface of the earth is radiating more than twice the amount of energy it receives from the sun because of a trace gas in the atmosphere and can not descibe exactly how this may be without violating some very fundamental laws of physics, then I tend to wonder if the climate scientists either A) has a clue, or B) is saying what he is saying because someone is paying him a great deal of money to say it.

The Sun only shines on one half of the planet continuously, the Earth emits radiation from it entire sphere continuously. The Earth emits, to rather remarkable precision, the same amount of energy it absorbs.

 

[Old Rocks]

All links that you have previously provided have been addressed and demonstrated to either not support your assertions or not even to address your assertions, the fact that you didn't learn anything from the lessons taught is on you youngun, not me.

And yet, your sources which have been proven lies are the ones you are willing to lay your hat on? Of course they will never be addressed from you.

Once again we have someone claiming sanity stating that most of the scientists world wide are lying. And that politicians on the energy companies payroll and drugged out radio jocks are real sources for scientific material. Lordy, lordy.

 

[Old Rocks]

If you have a pain you go to a doctor, if you don't like what the doctor tells you, you don't decide that there is no good medical answer and go to your lawyer or your mailman and ask them to see if they will give you an answer you like better,...do you?

If the doctor tells me that I have a fever when my temperature is 98.6 and that may be pregnant even though I am male and have been for my whole life, or that I may have tonsilitis even though I had my tonsils taken out when I was 6, I tend to wonder if the doctor knows what he is talking about. In fact, I may grab myself a medical text or two and see if my symptoms match anything like what he is claiming is wrong with me.

When a climate scientist tells me that the surface of the earth is radiating more than twice the amount of energy it receives from the sun because of a trace gas in the atmosphere and can not descibe exactly how this may be without violating some very fundamental laws of physics, then I tend to wonder if the climate scientists either A) has a clue, or B) is saying what he is saying because someone is paying him a great deal of money to say it.

Given the quality and tenor of your posts, I would tend to believe the doctor.

 

[gslack]

first I do not take orders from clones..

Second, I know that you asking him to prove he is right when you can't prove him wrong makes you a BS artist, not a very good one either...

He made an assertion you claim he is wrong so prove it if you can.

Third, "all you have ever asked?" LOL who the hell are you? Says you joined in February, I wasn't on here at the time been busy until recently. From the way you said that makes me wonder if you are a clone......

He made an assertion, I asked for reference or citation to evidence that compellingly supports his statement (as you noted, is the proper way of things,..."You make the claim its your job to back it up. Its a simple concept really. If you claim something, and then someones asks you to prove it, you can either prove it or not, but asking them to disprove it is lazy on your part.")

Bull! You claim he is wrong in effect. You imply he is incorrect and rather than prove he is, you ask him to support his claim with evidence. He can do that or not its his choice. You on the other hand have to either accept his word, disregard his word, or claim it false. But if you want others to agree or prove he is wrong the burden of proof or "disproof" in this case is on you.

You can twist it all you want genius, but if you want to prove him wrong then do so..

BTW, you may have noticed my use of the noun "proof" and the verbs "prove" and "disprove".. You seemed to have a problem differing the two before in another thread, so I thought I should clarify their proper use here again....

 

[gslack]

If you have a pain you go to a doctor, if you don't like what the doctor tells you, you don't decide that there is no good medical answer and go to your lawyer or your mailman and ask them to see if they will give you an answer you like better,...do you?

If the doctor tells me that I have a fever when my temperature is 98.6 and that may be pregnant even though I am male and have been for my whole life, or that I may have tonsilitis even though I had my tonsils taken out when I was 6, I tend to wonder if the doctor knows what he is talking about. In fact, I may grab myself a medical text or two and see if my symptoms match anything like what he is claiming is wrong with me.

When a climate scientist tells me that the surface of the earth is radiating more than twice the amount of energy it receives from the sun because of a trace gas in the atmosphere and can not descibe exactly how this may be without violating some very fundamental laws of physics, then I tend to wonder if the climate scientists either A) has a clue, or B) is saying what he is saying because someone is paying him a great deal of money to say it.

Given the quality and tenor of your posts, I would tend to believe the doctor.

Given the way you post propaganda and DON'T read it before posting, I would tend to doubt anything you believe...

 

[Trakar]

Bull! You claim he is wrong in effect. You imply he is incorrect and rather than prove he is, you ask him to support his claim with evidence.

So in your perception, when I ask someone to provide supporting cites or references for their assertions, I am actually claiming they are wrong and it is incumbent upon me to provide evidence that indicate they are incorrect rather than incombent upon them to provide support for their assertions?! Seriously!?

That's just sad.

 

[ScienceRocks]

08,21,2011, 5,274,844(fifth)

mins
2002 5,646,875
2003 6,032,031
2004 5,784,688
2005 5,315,156
2006 5,781,719
2007 4,254,531* (first)
2008 4,707,813* (second)
2009 5,249,844*(forth)
2010 4,813,594* (third)

3 more weeks before we normally bottom out and we're at number 5 as a melt season. We're 1,020,313 km^2 from number one! I think that we will be forth within the next few days and take a shot at 3rd and maybe second. First maybe safe for another year.

 

[gslack]

Bull! You claim he is wrong in effect. You imply he is incorrect and rather than prove he is, you ask him to support his claim with evidence.

So in your perception, when I ask someone to provide supporting cites or references for their assertions, I am actually claiming they are wrong and it is incumbent upon me to provide evidence that indicate they are incorrect rather than incombent upon them to provide support for their assertions?! Seriously!?

That's just sad.

NO tool! in reality if you doubt him you can prove him wrong or not, but asking him to prove it is up to him not you. Can you disprove it? Obviously not or else you would have done so...

Notice I bold-faced and underlined the words you had trouble with before? Yeah I used the verb "prove" because it was the action taken or to be taken. See how that worked genius? And YES that IS how we spell words here moron...

Proof = noun

Prove = verb

Disproof = Noun

Disprove = verb

Get it? Care to explain how a person who claims to have so much knowledge and implied education have the the concept of noun and verb (or the transitive verb) so utterly wrong? Its a simple concept taught in grade school genius yet you not only knew the difference but you tried to argue it after being told the mistake....

Dude you are a posturing, preening fake... You talk in circles of bullshit never actually saying anything of value all to imply some greater knowledge, brilliance or education that you neither have nor work for.... Pathetic....

 

[westwall]

Bull! You claim he is wrong in effect. You imply he is incorrect and rather than prove he is, you ask him to support his claim with evidence.

So in your perception, when I ask someone to provide supporting cites or references for their assertions, I am actually claiming they are wrong and it is incumbent upon me to provide evidence that indicate they are incorrect rather than incombent upon them to provide support for their assertions?! Seriously!?

That's just sad.

NO tool! in reality if you doubt him you can prove him wrong or not, but asking him to prove it is up to him not you. Can you disprove it? Obviously not or else you would have done so...

Notice I bold-faced and underlined the words you had trouble with before? Yeah I used the verb "prove" because it was the action taken or to be taken. See how that worked genius? And YES that IS how we spell words here moron...

Proof = noun

Prove = verb

Disproof = Noun

Disprove = verb

Get it? Care to explain how a person who claims to have so much knowledge and implied education have the the concept of noun and verb (or the transitive verb) so utterly wrong? Its a simple concept taught in grade school genius yet you not only knew the difference but you tried to argue it after being told the mistake....

Dude you are a posturing, preening fake... You talk in circles of bullshit never actually saying anything of value all to imply some greater knowledge, brilliance or education that you neither have nor work for.... Pathetic....

Indeed. Factual Posterer is my wifes term for them.