Mythbusters CO2 Scam Busted!!

[IlarMeilyr]

So just like your single-party authoritarian dream state, in other words. Are they any ways at all in which you don't think like a Stalinist?

The only ones dreaming of murder all day long are you and SSDD. Do they bring you comfort, all your dreams of exterminating your political enemies?

Keep dreaming all you want, but we still won't let you and fellow butcher SSDD exterminate millions, nor will we allow your authoritarian dream state to be implemented.



I don't have to ask if it bothers you, the way the whole planet considers you to be dishonest cultists. It so clearly does. And you know nothing you can do can change that, so you have to vent your frustrations here. Enjoy the life you've chosen, that of being a marginalized kook.

Obviously, manboob does not swell in a realm where words have and retain actual meaning.

Just to clarify things for that silly little know-nothing: NOTING that Mann's behavior is criminal or akin to criminal or even suggesting that he deserves to be prosecuted is NOT the same thing as persecuting Mann. The claim is just that. A claim. A contention.

But it is not putting him on a show trial where the outcome (conviction) is known before the first gavel drops.

The obvious truth of what I just said never deters a propagandist hack like manboob from merely repeating his baseless claim, He's like a mindless parrot. He can endlessly squawk out the word "Stalinist," but he clearly has not even the first hint of what that term actually means.

If a prosecutor were to decide to state that he suspects you have robbed banks back in your native Guatemala but in order to tell whether or not this is the case, he will need to search your home and the homes of your near relatives and good friends. Then and only then, will he be able to decide whether or not charge you with a crime. Is he persecuting you?

How many judges agreed with Cuccinelli regarding his justification, his authority or his standing? Let's see... NONE. So it would appear that the judiciary believes he never had a legal reason to do what he did to Mann. How does that NOT qualify as persecution?

If you were not a moron, would your posts still be as irrational and meaningless as the one I just quoted?

Prosecutors don't prosecute you here for some suspicions about crimes you may or may not have committed in Guatemala, you nimrod.

And prosecutors here do not get to rummage through your bank records or your relatives' homes (or whatever other idiocy you just brayed out) -- especially over a mere suspicion about some alleged criminality of yours in a place where they lack jurisdiction.

And your entire nonsensical baseless "hypothetical" is BESIDE the point anyway. It is not "persecution" nor is it "Stalinism" to accuse someone of possible criminal type behavior. Show me the alleged "show trial," and maybe then we can examine it rationally.

But in your case, I doubt it. Rationality is clearly not one of your strong suits.

 

[Crick]

Cuccinelli persecuted Mann just as you and every denier here has done. He just had bigger tools with which to identify himself as an ignorant, anti-science bigoted asshole.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Cuccinelli persecuted Mann just as you and every denier here has done. He just had bigger tools with which to identify himself as an ignorant, anti-science bigoted asshole.

Mann wasn't persecuted at all, not by anybody here (that claim you make is such a massive asshole fabrication that you have effectively conceded that you deserve no credibility) and not by Cuccinelli.

One may not agree with the demands made by Cuccinelli to get the data from the University of Virginia, but it is certainly plausible that a publicly funded University should be required to freely share "data" collected by a highly suspected fraud. In any case, the Cuccinelli effort was rejected by a judge. So -- tell us, you dishonest chimp, how does that equate with "persecution, again?

Words have meaning, you idiot. When you use them, meaning falls away. This is why you are not at all credible.

It should also be noted that being a skeptic of your implausible and utterly unverifiable (and never actually credited) AGW "theory" is not being a "denier." You use words poorly -- and dishonestly.

That's an inherent problem you Faux Science Faithers have.

 

[Crick]

So far, every judge that's weighed in on the case has said Cuccinelli didn't have cause. That settles the question right there and you lose. Not as bad as Cuccinelli lost, but keep trying. You can get down there if you really work at it Larry.

And soon Mann will own a good chunk of the National Register and the net worth of Mark Steyn. That's when you'll all tell us how the judge was paid off by Al Gore. Right?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

So far, every judge that's weighed in on the case has said Cuccinelli didn't have cause. That settles the question right there and you lose. Not as bad as Cuccinelli lost, but keep trying. You can get down there if you really work at it Larry.

And soon Mann will own a good chunk of the National Register and the net worth of Mark Steyn. That's when you'll all tell us how the judge was paid off by Al Gore. Right?

Wow. Judges didn't agree with Cuccinelli? And so what he wanted he didn't get?

Yup.

It is NOT a "persecution."

Thanks for reaffirming that words HAVE meaning. It truly sucks to be you.

Mann will not be winning anything, by the way. But, dream on. All you fraudsters tend to engage in that fantasy shit. Like AGW. Funny religion you have there.

 

[IanC]

Dude, do you know what the rate was in any of the chambers? Can you prove it was 400PPM? Nope, didn't think so, why, because they didn't measure it.................... The experiment is invalid in many ways because of that. But, to be clear, you have no idea what the rate of CO2 was right?

Rate? What rate? It's difficult to have a conversation on topics like these with you. It's like trying to discuss chemical acoustic attenuation with my cat.

They clearly stated that their named gas monitoring expert whose employer was also identified (thus providing a lot of impetus to speak accurately), set the CO2 LEVEL to 400 ppm and the methane LEVEL to 18 ppb. I don't think the man or his employer would have agreed to "We want you to come on the show where we will identify you and your employer and then lie outright about what you're doing here".

What evidence do YOU have that "they didn't measure it"? And if you actually believe "they didn't measure it", what the fuck is all this yelling about 7.351%?

God, are you stupid!

you dont seem to be understanding the question we are asking you. if the CO2 container is set to 400 ppm then how much CO2 is in the control? I dont remember them saying that the two controls were filled with N2/O2 with zero CO2 or methane. is that what your understanding is? or do you think the controls have 280 ppm CO2. I didnt hear that either, did you? or are you just making up stuff now.

the CO2 graph reading 7% actually looks like it is rapidly declining on the chart. perhaps it started even higher, and was losing the CO2 as the experiment wore on. but I dont know anything about that experiment for certain, and they certainly did a poor job of explaining the details.

 

[Crick]

So far, every judge that's weighed in on the case has said Cuccinelli didn't have cause. That settles the question right there and you lose. Not as bad as Cuccinelli lost, but keep trying. You can get down there if you really work at it Larry.

And soon Mann will own a good chunk of the National Register and the net worth of Mark Steyn. That's when you'll all tell us how the judge was paid off by Al Gore. Right?

Wow. Judges didn't agree with Cuccinelli? And so what he wanted he didn't get?

Yup.

It is NOT a "persecution."

Thanks for reaffirming that words HAVE meaning. It truly sucks to be you.

Mann will not be winning anything, by the way. But, dream on. All you fraudsters tend to engage in that fantasy shit. Like AGW. Funny religion you have there.

It was. It's over because the judiciary shut Cuccinelli down. And then the people of the state of Virginia did the same thing. I think that's excellent. I wouldn't want Ken Cuccinelli anywhere near any position of authority or power. He chose to persecute Michael Mann because he thought it would get him some votes from fools like you, not because he ever had any evidence that Mann had broken any laws. Those are the sort of principles that deserve to be kept in prison, not put into office.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

So far, every judge that's weighed in on the case has said Cuccinelli didn't have cause. That settles the question right there and you lose. Not as bad as Cuccinelli lost, but keep trying. You can get down there if you really work at it Larry.

And soon Mann will own a good chunk of the National Register and the net worth of Mark Steyn. That's when you'll all tell us how the judge was paid off by Al Gore. Right?

Wow. Judges didn't agree with Cuccinelli? And so what he wanted he didn't get?

Yup.

It is NOT a "persecution."

Thanks for reaffirming that words HAVE meaning. It truly sucks to be you.

Mann will not be winning anything, by the way. But, dream on. All you fraudsters tend to engage in that fantasy shit. Like AGW. Funny religion you have there.

It was. It's over because the judiciary shut Cuccinelli down. And then the people of the state of Virginia did the same thing. I think that's excellent. I wouldn't want Ken Cuccinelli anywhere near any position of authority or power. He chose to persecute Michael Mann because he thought it would get him some votes from fools like you, not because he ever had any evidence that Mann had broken any laws. Those are the sort of principles that deserve to be kept in prison, not put into office.

Crick, you poor dishonest deluded pathetic dolt, words STILL have meaning. And the meaning of "persecution" is NOT that Cuccinelli made a move about which you and some judge disagreed. There was no "persecution" under any honest definition of the word. And the discussion got STARTED, you should be reminded, not just by reference to the misuse of the word "persecution." It started by the idiotic and baseless asshole claim of "Stalinism."

So, once again, you dishonest hack: show me the show trial where Mann's conviction and punishment was predetermined?

Sorry, pal. Your fail is almost as endless as your honesty is lacking.

 

[Crick]

When the law declares a man guilty of a crime, he is guilty. When the law declares a man innocent of a crime, he is innocent of that crime. When the judiciary concluded that Cuccinelli did not have justification to seize the personal material of Mann's that he was attempting to seize, Cuccinelli was, by definition, guilty of persecution. He was pursuing a man without legal cause. He acted OUTSIDE the law. He was persecuting Mann.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

When the law declares a man guilty of a crime, he is guilty. When the law declares a man innocent of a crime, he is innocent of that crime. When the judiciary concluded that Cuccinelli did not have justification to seize the personal material of Mann's that he was attempting to seize, Cuccinelli was, by definition, guilty of persecution. He was pursuing a man without legal cause. He acted OUTSIDE the law. He was persecuting Mann.

I enjoy your ignorance. You're funny in a dumb ass way.

When a person accused of a crime is convicted, he is guilty -- in the eyes of the law until and unless the conviction gets overturned.

NO PERSON in this Republic of ours is ever "declared" "innocent." A person is presumed innocent in the eyes of the law and may get convicted (defeating the presumption of innocence) OR he might be found "not guilty" which secures the legal presumption. But nobody is ever found "innocent."

The judge denied the effort of Cuccinelli to get the PUBLICLY PAID FOR allegedly scientific DATA (etc.) of Mann from the publicly funded University of Virginia.

That is not the same as Cuccinelli being "guilty" of anything, least of all "persecution."

Sorry, you silly petty little hack, but words STILL have meaning, even if tools like you refuse to acknowledge those meanings.

And STILL not a HINT of "Stalinism." But your cowardly evasion effort is noted.

 

[Crick]

When the law declares a man guilty of a crime, he is guilty. When the law declares a man innocent of a crime, he is innocent of that crime. When the judiciary concluded that Cuccinelli did not have justification to seize the personal material of Mann's that he was attempting to seize, Cuccinelli was, by definition, guilty of persecution. He was pursuing a man without legal cause. He acted OUTSIDE the law. He was persecuting Mann.

I enjoy your ignorance. You're funny in a dumb ass way.

When a person accused of a crime is convicted, he is guilty -- in the eyes of the law until and unless the conviction gets overturned.

NO PERSON in this Republic of ours is ever "declared" "innocent." A person is presumed innocent in the eyes of the law and may get convicted (defeating the presumption of innocence) OR he might be found "not guilty" which secures the legal presumption. But nobody is ever found "innocent."

The judge denied the effort of Cuccinelli to get the PUBLICLY PAID FOR allegedly scientific DATA (etc.) of Mann from the publicly funded University of Virginia.

That is not the same as Cuccinelli being "guilty" of anything, least of all "persecution."

Sorry, you silly petty little hack, but words STILL have meaning, even if tools like you refuse to acknowledge those meanings.

And STILL not a HINT of "Stalinism." But your cowardly evasion effort is noted.

Joe Blow gets charged with a crime. A trial is held. At the end of the trial, the jury eithher declares that they find him guilty or that they find him not guilty. If the latter, than he is being declared innocent of a crime.

He and you and all your buddies have persecuted Mann without cause. Assholes for that. All of you.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

When the law declares a man guilty of a crime, he is guilty. When the law declares a man innocent of a crime, he is innocent of that crime. When the judiciary concluded that Cuccinelli did not have justification to seize the personal material of Mann's that he was attempting to seize, Cuccinelli was, by definition, guilty of persecution. He was pursuing a man without legal cause. He acted OUTSIDE the law. He was persecuting Mann.

I enjoy your ignorance. You're funny in a dumb ass way.

When a person accused of a crime is convicted, he is guilty -- in the eyes of the law until and unless the conviction gets overturned.

NO PERSON in this Republic of ours is ever "declared" "innocent." A person is presumed innocent in the eyes of the law and may get convicted (defeating the presumption of innocence) OR he might be found "not guilty" which secures the legal presumption. But nobody is ever found "innocent."

The judge denied the effort of Cuccinelli to get the PUBLICLY PAID FOR allegedly scientific DATA (etc.) of Mann from the publicly funded University of Virginia.

That is not the same as Cuccinelli being "guilty" of anything, least of all "persecution."

Sorry, you silly petty little hack, but words STILL have meaning, even if tools like you refuse to acknowledge those meanings.

And STILL not a HINT of "Stalinism." But your cowardly evasion effort is noted.

Joe Blow gets charged with a crime. A trial is held. At the end of the trial, the jury eithher declares that they find him guilty or that they find him not guilty. If the latter, than he is being declared innocent of a crime.

He and you and all your buddies have persecuted Mann without cause. Assholes for that. All of you.

Wrong.

NOBODY is EVER declared "innocent."

Repeating your flatly ignorant assertion doesn't convert it into anything but what it already was: flatly wrong.

And Cuccinelli didn't accuse shithead Mann of a crime. He issued a civil type tool to begin an investigation on a theory of criminality. No arrest had been made. No indictment had been filed. And some judges then said that the effort was invalid. So, there was no persecution and could have been no persecution.

Now, hurry back and repeat your ignorant and erroneous brayings, cricky. Nobody expects honesty from you at this point.

Mann, by the way, like you, is a fraud. Noting as much is not even remotely akin to "persecution," you fraudulent pissant lying twerp. Get over yourself.

 

[Crick]

Just in case anyone's forgotten, the actual theme of this thread, the claim that the Mythbusters attempting to demonstrate the greenhouse effect were forced to raise the CO2 level in their boxes to 7.35% is complete bullshit. The greenhouse effect was demonstrated with 400 ppm of CO2 and 18 ppb of CH4.

This discussion about whether or not Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia AG "persecuted" Michael Mann is a detour designed to take your mind off the complete and desperate failure of this thread's original argument.

Cuccinelli, as you may be aware, attempted to subpoena Mann's emails from the University of Virginia. Unfortunately, judge after judge told him he was full of shit but utterly lacking cause. He didn't get Mann's emails. Then he didn't get elected. Now he's out of work, I guess. That makes me happy as a pig in shit. Cuccinelli is an ass. Anyone who support what he tried to do to Mann is an ass. I hope I'm clear there.

 

[westwall]

When the law declares a man guilty of a crime, he is guilty. When the law declares a man innocent of a crime, he is innocent of that crime. When the judiciary concluded that Cuccinelli did not have justification to seize the personal material of Mann's that he was attempting to seize, Cuccinelli was, by definition, guilty of persecution. He was pursuing a man without legal cause. He acted OUTSIDE the law. He was persecuting Mann.

I enjoy your ignorance. You're funny in a dumb ass way.

When a person accused of a crime is convicted, he is guilty -- in the eyes of the law until and unless the conviction gets overturned.

NO PERSON in this Republic of ours is ever "declared" "innocent." A person is presumed innocent in the eyes of the law and may get convicted (defeating the presumption of innocence) OR he might be found "not guilty" which secures the legal presumption. But nobody is ever found "innocent."

The judge denied the effort of Cuccinelli to get the PUBLICLY PAID FOR allegedly scientific DATA (etc.) of Mann from the publicly funded University of Virginia.

That is not the same as Cuccinelli being "guilty" of anything, least of all "persecution."

Sorry, you silly petty little hack, but words STILL have meaning, even if tools like you refuse to acknowledge those meanings.

And STILL not a HINT of "Stalinism." But your cowardly evasion effort is noted.

Joe Blow gets charged with a crime. A trial is held. At the end of the trial, the jury eithher declares that they find him guilty or that they find him not guilty. If the latter, than he is being declared innocent of a crime.

He and you and all your buddies have persecuted Mann without cause. Assholes for that. All of you.

Untrue. He is found only NOT GUILTY. To be declared innocent there is a separate hearing (that MUST be requested by the defendant) where he requests a FINDING OF FACTUAL INNOCENCE. After THAT hearing the Judge will determine whether the facts warrant the finding.

Once again you demonstrate your colossal ignorance.

 

[IanC]

Just in case anyone's forgotten, the actual theme of this thread, the claim that the Mythbusters attempting to demonstrate the greenhouse effect were forced to raise the CO2 level in their boxes to 7.35% is complete bullshit. The greenhouse effect was demonstrated with 400 ppm of CO2 and 18 ppb of CH4.

This discussion about whether or not Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia AG "persecuted" Michael Mann is a detour designed to take your mind off the complete and desperate failure of this thread's original argument.

Cuccinelli, as you may be aware, attempted to subpoena Mann's emails from the University of Virginia. Unfortunately, judge after judge told him he was full of shit but utterly lacking cause. He didn't get Mann's emails. Then he didn't get elected. Now he's out of work, I guess. That makes me happy as a pig in shit. Cuccinelli is an ass. Anyone who support what he tried to do to Mann is an ass. I hope I'm clear there.

If the CO2 box was 400 ppm and the methane box was 18 ppb then what was in the control boxes?

 

[IanC]

Just in case anyone's forgotten, the actual theme of this thread, the claim that the Mythbusters attempting to demonstrate the greenhouse effect were forced to raise the CO2 level in their boxes to 7.35% is complete bullshit. The greenhouse effect was demonstrated with 400 ppm of CO2 and 18 ppb of CH4.

This discussion about whether or not Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia AG "persecuted" Michael Mann is a detour designed to take your mind off the complete and desperate failure of this thread's original argument.

Cuccinelli, as you may be aware, attempted to subpoena Mann's emails from the University of Virginia. Unfortunately, judge after judge told him he was full of shit but utterly lacking cause. He didn't get Mann's emails. Then he didn't get elected. Now he's out of work, I guess. That makes me happy as a pig in shit. Cuccinelli is an ass. Anyone who support what he tried to do to Mann is an ass. I hope I'm clear there.

I think the FOIA covers Mann's work. But if it doesn't then why is there a double standard when it comes to others who do not kowtow to AGW? Wegman's emails were released in less than a month and I can come up with other instances.

 

[Crick]

The law does not make generalities. If you want to know how the two cases differed, read the decisions. For one, the circuit court found that Cuccinelli had presented insufficient information suggesting the occurrence of a crime. That was not the case with Wegman, for which evidence of plagiarism existed from the start.

 

[Crick]

Just in case anyone's forgotten, the actual theme of this thread, the claim that the Mythbusters attempting to demonstrate the greenhouse effect were forced to raise the CO2 level in their boxes to 7.35% is complete bullshit. The greenhouse effect was demonstrated with 400 ppm of CO2 and 18 ppb of CH4.

This discussion about whether or not Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia AG "persecuted" Michael Mann is a detour designed to take your mind off the complete and desperate failure of this thread's original argument.

Cuccinelli, as you may be aware, attempted to subpoena Mann's emails from the University of Virginia. Unfortunately, judge after judge told him he was full of shit but utterly lacking cause. He didn't get Mann's emails. Then he didn't get elected. Now he's out of work, I guess. That makes me happy as a pig in shit. Cuccinelli is an ass. Anyone who support what he tried to do to Mann is an ass. I hope I'm clear there.

If the CO2 box was 400 ppm and the methane box was 18 ppb then what was in the control boxes?

I do not know for certain - a 5 minute video is not a journal publication and this was much more a demonstration than an experiment. Either no CO2 or 280 ppm CO2.

 

[skookerasbil]

When the law declares a man guilty of a crime, he is guilty. When the law declares a man innocent of a crime, he is innocent of that crime. When the judiciary concluded that Cuccinelli did not have justification to seize the personal material of Mann's that he was attempting to seize, Cuccinelli was, by definition, guilty of persecution. He was pursuing a man without legal cause. He acted OUTSIDE the law. He was persecuting Mann.

I enjoy your ignorance. You're funny in a dumb ass way.

When a person accused of a crime is convicted, he is guilty -- in the eyes of the law until and unless the conviction gets overturned.

NO PERSON in this Republic of ours is ever "declared" "innocent." A person is presumed innocent in the eyes of the law and may get convicted (defeating the presumption of innocence) OR he might be found "not guilty" which secures the legal presumption. But nobody is ever found "innocent."

The judge denied the effort of Cuccinelli to get the PUBLICLY PAID FOR allegedly scientific DATA (etc.) of Mann from the publicly funded University of Virginia.

That is not the same as Cuccinelli being "guilty" of anything, least of all "persecution."

Sorry, you silly petty little hack, but words STILL have meaning, even if tools like you refuse to acknowledge those meanings.

And STILL not a HINT of "Stalinism." But your cowardly evasion effort is noted.

Joe Blow gets charged with a crime. A trial is held. At the end of the trial, the jury eithher declares that they find him guilty or that they find him not guilty. If the latter, than he is being declared innocent of a crime.

He and you and all your buddies have persecuted Mann without cause. Assholes for that. All of you.

Perhaps s0n......perhaps!!!! But we don't give a rats ass.


You know why?


Because we are not losing!!!



http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/313851-more-proof-the-skeptics-are-winning.html

 

[Crick]

Am I supposed to be impressed? Someone who knows they are behaving like an asshole but chooses not to change is infinitely worse that someone who simply doesn't know. And you'd have had no difficulty convincing us of your ignorance.