More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[orogenicman]

So you haven't been following the board this past year? See how that works? That you are a greenhouse gas denier is your problem, not mine.

how do you reach that statement from me asking you for a lab experiment? Hmmm... seems you're avoiding the post and really don't have an experiment that you, with a science degree, states is part of the science. so S0n, where is that experiment? Got a link?

Do you? My money says that you don't. And that you haven't bothered to try to find out for yourself. You are so convinced that all the scientists are either wrong or in cahoots that you have ignored months worth of posts by myself and others on the subject. Moreover, I don't have to prove anything to you. The science is there. if you believe it isn't, it is on YOU to prove that it isn't. That's the way science works. if you have a problem with that, tough titties.

why not just say you don't have one. Isn't that simpler than looking like you're scrambling all over the place to avoid the subject? You Lose, that's fine, see, if the science was indeed science, then there would be an experiment that demonstrates how 120 PPM of CO2 added to existing 280 PPM can add heat to the atmosphere or surface. And s0n, I have looked all over and I did find one, Herr Koch 1901, scientist, who proved that adding CO2 after saturation, does not increase temperatures. So, feel free again, to prove Herr Koch's experiment wrong. It isn't up to me to prove my own find as wrong. It is up to you! ready set go!!!

I don't have to have one. It is that simple, dumbass. The greenhouse effect is long established science. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat for all I care. And you'd look just as stupid as you do now.

Well if you are indeed a person with a science degree, and believe in the greenhouse effect, wouldn't it make sense to actually understand it? Seems s0n, you don't. I'm fine with you not proving your point, points, then get off of here and enjoy your life. However, if you feel the need to be here and addressing me, I want the experiment that disproves the one I mentioned. BTW, I'm not the only one asking for said experiment. Ian just asked you. So you will find, that if you choose to march down the path you are, you should be prepared to address the posts that come your way. See preaching for the intent of preaching isn't what we all believe. We demand proof.

You guys make a ridiculous challenge based on nothing at all, and then are surprised when no one takes you up on it. That, SON, is the very definition of irony.

 

[jc456]

how do you reach that statement from me asking you for a lab experiment? Hmmm... seems you're avoiding the post and really don't have an experiment that you, with a science degree, states is part of the science. so S0n, where is that experiment? Got a link?

Do you? My money says that you don't. And that you haven't bothered to try to find out for yourself. You are so convinced that all the scientists are either wrong or in cahoots that you have ignored months worth of posts by myself and others on the subject. Moreover, I don't have to prove anything to you. The science is there. if you believe it isn't, it is on YOU to prove that it isn't. That's the way science works. if you have a problem with that, tough titties.

why not just say you don't have one. Isn't that simpler than looking like you're scrambling all over the place to avoid the subject? You Lose, that's fine, see, if the science was indeed science, then there would be an experiment that demonstrates how 120 PPM of CO2 added to existing 280 PPM can add heat to the atmosphere or surface. And s0n, I have looked all over and I did find one, Herr Koch 1901, scientist, who proved that adding CO2 after saturation, does not increase temperatures. So, feel free again, to prove Herr Koch's experiment wrong. It isn't up to me to prove my own find as wrong. It is up to you! ready set go!!!

I don't have to have one. It is that simple, dumbass. The greenhouse effect is long established science. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat for all I care. And you'd look just as stupid as you do now.

Well if you are indeed a person with a science degree, and believe in the greenhouse effect, wouldn't it make sense to actually understand it? Seems s0n, you don't. I'm fine with you not proving your point, points, then get off of here and enjoy your life. However, if you feel the need to be here and addressing me, I want the experiment that disproves the one I mentioned. BTW, I'm not the only one asking for said experiment. Ian just asked you. So you will find, that if you choose to march down the path you are, you should be prepared to address the posts that come your way. See preaching for the intent of preaching isn't what we all believe. We demand proof.

You guys make a ridiculous challenge based on nothing at all, and then are surprised when no one takes you up on it. That, SON, is the very definition of irony.

so you agree with us. All of the links and journals, there isn't an experiment that actually proves adding 120 PPM of CO2 does anything to temperatures. I appreciate you validating our position. And a challenge is something a scientist ought to take on. Isn't that what science is about, understanding of what the subject is? For someone who has a science degree, it seems I know more about how it operates than you.

 

[orogenicman]

Do you? My money says that you don't. And that you haven't bothered to try to find out for yourself. You are so convinced that all the scientists are either wrong or in cahoots that you have ignored months worth of posts by myself and others on the subject. Moreover, I don't have to prove anything to you. The science is there. if you believe it isn't, it is on YOU to prove that it isn't. That's the way science works. if you have a problem with that, tough titties.

why not just say you don't have one. Isn't that simpler than looking like you're scrambling all over the place to avoid the subject? You Lose, that's fine, see, if the science was indeed science, then there would be an experiment that demonstrates how 120 PPM of CO2 added to existing 280 PPM can add heat to the atmosphere or surface. And s0n, I have looked all over and I did find one, Herr Koch 1901, scientist, who proved that adding CO2 after saturation, does not increase temperatures. So, feel free again, to prove Herr Koch's experiment wrong. It isn't up to me to prove my own find as wrong. It is up to you! ready set go!!!

I don't have to have one. It is that simple, dumbass. The greenhouse effect is long established science. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat for all I care. And you'd look just as stupid as you do now.

Well if you are indeed a person with a science degree, and believe in the greenhouse effect, wouldn't it make sense to actually understand it? Seems s0n, you don't. I'm fine with you not proving your point, points, then get off of here and enjoy your life. However, if you feel the need to be here and addressing me, I want the experiment that disproves the one I mentioned. BTW, I'm not the only one asking for said experiment. Ian just asked you. So you will find, that if you choose to march down the path you are, you should be prepared to address the posts that come your way. See preaching for the intent of preaching isn't what we all believe. We demand proof.

You guys make a ridiculous challenge based on nothing at all, and then are surprised when no one takes you up on it. That, SON, is the very definition of irony.

so you agree with us.

You'd have to be pretty stupid (or else haven't bothered to comprehend my posts) to believe that.

 

[jc456]

why not just say you don't have one. Isn't that simpler than looking like you're scrambling all over the place to avoid the subject? You Lose, that's fine, see, if the science was indeed science, then there would be an experiment that demonstrates how 120 PPM of CO2 added to existing 280 PPM can add heat to the atmosphere or surface. And s0n, I have looked all over and I did find one, Herr Koch 1901, scientist, who proved that adding CO2 after saturation, does not increase temperatures. So, feel free again, to prove Herr Koch's experiment wrong. It isn't up to me to prove my own find as wrong. It is up to you! ready set go!!!

I don't have to have one. It is that simple, dumbass. The greenhouse effect is long established science. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat for all I care. And you'd look just as stupid as you do now.

Well if you are indeed a person with a science degree, and believe in the greenhouse effect, wouldn't it make sense to actually understand it? Seems s0n, you don't. I'm fine with you not proving your point, points, then get off of here and enjoy your life. However, if you feel the need to be here and addressing me, I want the experiment that disproves the one I mentioned. BTW, I'm not the only one asking for said experiment. Ian just asked you. So you will find, that if you choose to march down the path you are, you should be prepared to address the posts that come your way. See preaching for the intent of preaching isn't what we all believe. We demand proof.

You guys make a ridiculous challenge based on nothing at all, and then are surprised when no one takes you up on it. That, SON, is the very definition of irony.

so you agree with us.

You'd have to be pretty stupid (or else haven't bothered to comprehend my posts) to believe that.

dude, I completely understand. You don't have scientific evidence to support a rise in temperature because CO2 increased. I get it. You have no links or journals to support the claim either. Got it, just as I stated in my response to yours. We're good. You have no proof of AGW.

 

[orogenicman]

I don't have to have one. It is that simple, dumbass. The greenhouse effect is long established science. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat for all I care. And you'd look just as stupid as you do now.

Well if you are indeed a person with a science degree, and believe in the greenhouse effect, wouldn't it make sense to actually understand it? Seems s0n, you don't. I'm fine with you not proving your point, points, then get off of here and enjoy your life. However, if you feel the need to be here and addressing me, I want the experiment that disproves the one I mentioned. BTW, I'm not the only one asking for said experiment. Ian just asked you. So you will find, that if you choose to march down the path you are, you should be prepared to address the posts that come your way. See preaching for the intent of preaching isn't what we all believe. We demand proof.

You guys make a ridiculous challenge based on nothing at all, and then are surprised when no one takes you up on it. That, SON, is the very definition of irony.

so you agree with us.

You'd have to be pretty stupid (or else haven't bothered to comprehend my posts) to believe that.

dude, I completely understand. You don't have scientific evidence to support a rise in temperature because CO2 increased. I get it. You have no links or journals to support the claim either. Got it, just as I stated in my response to yours. We're good. You have no proof of AGW.

Yes we do. Saying we don't is just stupid and irresponsible. But you knew that. The greenhouse effect is very well established scientific fact. I find it unremarkable that many (but not all) of the same people who claim it is not fact also believe in creationism. It is unremarkable because I see them using the exact same flawed methodology in their arguments whether they are arguing against evolution or against climate change. I do not believe this to be coincidental.

 

[jc456]

Well if you are indeed a person with a science degree, and believe in the greenhouse effect, wouldn't it make sense to actually understand it? Seems s0n, you don't. I'm fine with you not proving your point, points, then get off of here and enjoy your life. However, if you feel the need to be here and addressing me, I want the experiment that disproves the one I mentioned. BTW, I'm not the only one asking for said experiment. Ian just asked you. So you will find, that if you choose to march down the path you are, you should be prepared to address the posts that come your way. See preaching for the intent of preaching isn't what we all believe. We demand proof.

You guys make a ridiculous challenge based on nothing at all, and then are surprised when no one takes you up on it. That, SON, is the very definition of irony.

so you agree with us.

You'd have to be pretty stupid (or else haven't bothered to comprehend my posts) to believe that.

dude, I completely understand. You don't have scientific evidence to support a rise in temperature because CO2 increased. I get it. You have no links or journals to support the claim either. Got it, just as I stated in my response to yours. We're good. You have no proof of AGW.

Yes we do. Saying we don't is just stupid and irresponsible. But you knew that. The greenhouse effect is very well established scientific fact. I find it unremarkable that many (but not all) of the same people who claim it is not fact also believe in creationism. It is unremarkable because I see them using the exact same flawed methodology in their arguments whether they are arguing against evolution or against climate change. I do not believe this to be coincidental.

and yet, still no proof has ever been presented in over a year on this message board. Hence why I made my comment earlier. No one ever said there isn't a greenhouse effect, all we've been asking for is proof that CO2 does anything to change it as it increases in the atmosphere. Again, to date, none. The use on here are models that have been proven wrong. Models are not experiments, and again there, we are looking for the one that disproves Herr Koch's from 1901. You have it, show it. You'd be the first.

 

[orogenicman]

You guys make a ridiculous challenge based on nothing at all, and then are surprised when no one takes you up on it. That, SON, is the very definition of irony.

so you agree with us.

You'd have to be pretty stupid (or else haven't bothered to comprehend my posts) to believe that.

dude, I completely understand. You don't have scientific evidence to support a rise in temperature because CO2 increased. I get it. You have no links or journals to support the claim either. Got it, just as I stated in my response to yours. We're good. You have no proof of AGW.

Yes we do. Saying we don't is just stupid and irresponsible. But you knew that. The greenhouse effect is very well established scientific fact. I find it unremarkable that many (but not all) of the same people who claim it is not fact also believe in creationism. It is unremarkable because I see them using the exact same flawed methodology in their arguments whether they are arguing against evolution or against climate change. I do not believe this to be coincidental.

and yet, still no proof has ever been presented in over a year on this message board. Hence why I made my comment earlier. No one ever said there isn't a greenhouse effect, all we've been asking for is proof that CO2 does anything to change it as it increases in the atmosphere. Again, to date, none. The use on here are models that have been proven wrong. Models are not experiments, and again there, we are looking for the one that disproves Herr Koch's from 1901. You have it, show it. You'd be the first.

You seem to believe that you are special, that you don't have to get an education (and pay for it) like the rest of us? What is it that makes you so special? You want an answer to your question? Look it up. Or hire me as a consultant (at $80/hr - a reasonable price), and I'll write you up a report. Or not. Your choice. Either way, I don't give a damn about what you think anyone is required to show you.

 

[jc456]

so you agree with us.

You'd have to be pretty stupid (or else haven't bothered to comprehend my posts) to believe that.

dude, I completely understand. You don't have scientific evidence to support a rise in temperature because CO2 increased. I get it. You have no links or journals to support the claim either. Got it, just as I stated in my response to yours. We're good. You have no proof of AGW.

Yes we do. Saying we don't is just stupid and irresponsible. But you knew that. The greenhouse effect is very well established scientific fact. I find it unremarkable that many (but not all) of the same people who claim it is not fact also believe in creationism. It is unremarkable because I see them using the exact same flawed methodology in their arguments whether they are arguing against evolution or against climate change. I do not believe this to be coincidental.

and yet, still no proof has ever been presented in over a year on this message board. Hence why I made my comment earlier. No one ever said there isn't a greenhouse effect, all we've been asking for is proof that CO2 does anything to change it as it increases in the atmosphere. Again, to date, none. The use on here are models that have been proven wrong. Models are not experiments, and again there, we are looking for the one that disproves Herr Koch's from 1901. You have it, show it. You'd be the first.

You seem to believe that you are special, that you don't have to get an education (and pay for it) like the rest of us? What is it that makes you so special? You want an answer to your question? Look it up. Or hire me as a consultant (at $80/hr - a reasonable price), and I'll write you up a report. Or not. Your choice. Either way, I don't give a damn about what you think anyone is required to show you.

I am special. I can out think any scientist by asking one simple question. Hah!!!!!How about that. I only want the answer to the question if you wish to promote the leftist warming scare. You want to shout off the mountain tops the sky is falling, then dude present me the answer to my question. Yes I want it then. If you wish to fold and accept the loss which is yours without it, then so be that as well. That just makes you a loser. See, it seems, hahahahah seems, you are a very lazy individual who wishes only to spout off more stupid. And me the special one, will continue to ask the question to which you and your scientist can't answer. Then I will shout from the mountain tops.....WiNniNg

 

[orogenicman]

You'd have to be pretty stupid (or else haven't bothered to comprehend my posts) to believe that.

dude, I completely understand. You don't have scientific evidence to support a rise in temperature because CO2 increased. I get it. You have no links or journals to support the claim either. Got it, just as I stated in my response to yours. We're good. You have no proof of AGW.

Yes we do. Saying we don't is just stupid and irresponsible. But you knew that. The greenhouse effect is very well established scientific fact. I find it unremarkable that many (but not all) of the same people who claim it is not fact also believe in creationism. It is unremarkable because I see them using the exact same flawed methodology in their arguments whether they are arguing against evolution or against climate change. I do not believe this to be coincidental.

and yet, still no proof has ever been presented in over a year on this message board. Hence why I made my comment earlier. No one ever said there isn't a greenhouse effect, all we've been asking for is proof that CO2 does anything to change it as it increases in the atmosphere. Again, to date, none. The use on here are models that have been proven wrong. Models are not experiments, and again there, we are looking for the one that disproves Herr Koch's from 1901. You have it, show it. You'd be the first.

You seem to believe that you are special, that you don't have to get an education (and pay for it) like the rest of us? What is it that makes you so special? You want an answer to your question? Look it up. Or hire me as a consultant (at $80/hr - a reasonable price), and I'll write you up a report. Or not. Your choice. Either way, I don't give a damn about what you think anyone is required to show you.

I am special. I can out think any scientist by asking one simple question. Hah!!!!!How about that. I only want the answer to the question if you wish to promote the leftist warming scare. You want to shout off the mountain tops the sky is falling, then dude present me the answer to my question. Yes I want it then. If you wish to fold and accept the loss which is yours without it, then so be that as well. That just makes you a loser. See, it seems, hahahahah seems, you are a very lazy individual who wishes only to spout off more stupid. And me the special one, will continue to ask the question to which you and your scientist can't answer. Then I will shout from the mountain tops.....WiNniNg

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

I call Bull Shit!

 

[orogenicman]

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

I call Bull Shit!

Call it what you want, I don't work for free.

 

[jc456]

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

I call Bull Shit!

Call it what you want, I don't work for free.

and you walk around with a lot of stupid. You definitely own the more stupid tag for the day!!! Welcome to a message board where you think you ought to get paid to have a discussion. LOL Hey everybody new Stupid post, might be one for the month!!!!! [email protected]!!!

Maybe you should find a restroom and sit!

 

[orogenicman]

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

I call Bull Shit!

Call it what you want, I don't work for free.

and you walk around with a lot of stupid. You definitely own the more stupid tag for the day!!! Welcome to a message board where you think you ought to get paid to have a discussion. LOL Hey everybody new Stupid post, might be one for the month!!!!! [email protected]!!!

Maybe you should find a restroom and sit!

Wrong. You want me to conduct research for you. And I don't work for free. Either pay up or do your own damned research.

 

[jc456]

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

I call Bull Shit!

Call it what you want, I don't work for free.

and you walk around with a lot of stupid. You definitely own the more stupid tag for the day!!! Welcome to a message board where you think you ought to get paid to have a discussion. LOL Hey everybody new Stupid post, might be one for the month!!!!! [email protected]!!!

Maybe you should find a restroom and sit!

Wrong. You want me to conduct research for you. And I don't work for free. Either pay up or do your own damned research.

And more stupid!

 

[jc456]

Now the lefties want to get paid to post on message boards. How funny is that? Only goes to show they have nothing and confirms, validates that there is no experiment! Team Skeptics we WIN!!!! Game set and match!

 

[skookerasbil]

Hey Orangeman........how about that link s0n??






The level of ghey is deafening.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

I call Bull Shit!

Call it what you want, I don't work for free.

and you walk around with a lot of stupid. You definitely own the more stupid tag for the day!!! Welcome to a message board where you think you ought to get paid to have a discussion. LOL Hey everybody new Stupid post, might be one for the month!!!!! [email protected]!!!

Maybe you should find a restroom and sit!

Wrong. You want me to conduct research for you. And I don't work for free. Either pay up or do your own damned research.

LOL.. what a stupid moron.

As a scientist I am after the truth. I have freely posted both mine and others research because the truth is what is important. As you seem to have a price on the truth i can see that the agenda and being a paid shill are both more important to you.

The Stupid, It burns.... You are exposed as the shill you are and the paid hack you are.. Do they give you an Obama phone to receive your EPA/IPCC talking points from?

 

[mamooth]

Orog, nobody pays any attention to this thread except the hardcore denier circle-jerkers. Just leave it, and let them madly stroke each other out of the sight of decent people. This thread is so spooge-encrusted, only the gayest of gay men still hang out in it. Posting in it is like screaming "NO CLOSET CAN HOLD ME!".

 

[Billy_Bob]

Orog, nobody pays any attention to this thread except the hardcore denier circle-jerkers. Just leave it, and let them madly stroke each other out of the sight of decent people. This thread is so spooge-encrusted, only the gayest of gay men still hang out in it. Posting in it is like screaming "NO CLOSET CAN HOLD ME!".

The Hairball answered its Obama phone and showed just how desperate it is to be seen as relevant...

 

[orogenicman]

Sure, I can do that. You want my expertize? I'll give it to you for $80/hr. Send me a private message and I will give you details on how you can pay. Otherwise I don't care what you think you deserve. You aren't special to me. You're just like every other denier I've come across on the internet.

I call Bull Shit!

Call it what you want, I don't work for free.

and you walk around with a lot of stupid. You definitely own the more stupid tag for the day!!! Welcome to a message board where you think you ought to get paid to have a discussion. LOL Hey everybody new Stupid post, might be one for the month!!!!! [email protected]!!!

Maybe you should find a restroom and sit!

Wrong. You want me to conduct research for you. And I don't work for free. Either pay up or do your own damned research.

LOL.. what a stupid moron.

As a scientist I am after the truth. I have freely posted both mine and others research because the truth is what is important. As you seem to have a price on the truth i can see that the agenda and being a paid shill are both more important to you.

The Stupid, It burns.... You are exposed as the shill you are and the paid hack you are.. Do they give you an Obama phone to receive your EPA/IPCC talking points from?

How many scientists do you know who don't get paid for their work? We all have to make a living, sunny. So pay up or fuck off.