Scientists Suggest Earth Could Be Uninhabitable In 300 Years

[RollingThunder]

And yet they forget Gay-Lussac's Law: The temperature of a gas is directly proportional to its pressure. So when you take a gas in solid form and allow it to change phase it increases the pressure in the container and raises the temperature inside. DUH!

Duh! indeed. You are such a phony. What "solid form", nitwit? They are not putting dry ice in the bottle, they are using a source of CO2 gas. The pressures in the bottles are the same.

To do a legit experiment like you wish you need approximately 4,000 cubic feet of controlled atmosphere (this mitigates the above gas law). It needs to be walled in by a fixed thickness of optically neautral glass or lexan. It needs to have direct access to sunlight (thus in a perfect world the boxes would both be outside with no overhead cover of any kind) there can be NO outside influence so the boxes must have the atmosphere introduced then hermetically sealed. The experiment must run for at least a month with temperature being checked every minute 24 hours a day. There are a whole host of other factors that need to be considered to make it a robust and verifiable experiment but this is a good start.

Your little high school "experiments" are cute but they are not valid. You could introduce pure Argon into your experiments and get the same result...that's why they are not valid.

That is total horseshit, retard. You have no idea what you're talking about. These experiments, and there are many of them summarized on various educational websites, each one with slightly different procedures and setups, demonstrate a simple principle. Certain gases absorb infrared radiation and, BTW, argon is not one of them (so you're wrong about that too). Thousands of physics teachers in many countries at the high school level and college and university level, have used these experiments in their classes. But you're the only one to spot the "flaws". LOL. You are an ignorant little shithead with no real knowledge of science or physics, despite your ridiculous pretensions to the contrary.

Here's another similar experiment from Arizona State University with a different setup.

GREENHOUSE EFFECT IN THE CLASSROOM: A PROJECT- AND LABORATORY-BASED CURRICULUM

I chose argon specifically because it is inert you dolt.

You said you "could introduce pure Argon into your experiments and get the same result" and that is not true. CO2 demonstrably absorbs more energy from the light source and gets hotter.

The CO2 in experiment one was generated by the introduction of oh let's see what was it???? Oh yeah dry ice! A SOLID form of CO2 you dimwit! When it vaporises it increases the pressure of the container and increases the heat.....simple high school physics which you neglected to take.

You are such a ridiculous bluffer, moron. In the first experiment I showed you in post #153, the dry ice is placed in the 125-mL Erlenmeyer flask and conveyed through a tube to the 500-mL beaker as the experiment procedure clearly states and which you would understand if you were capable of understanding science which you're not.
"Equipment Setup

1. Carefully take the rubber stopper out of the Erlenmeyer flask, put several pieces of dry ice into the flask, and put the stopper back into the flask.

2. When the carbon dioxide concentration levels off, put the clamp on the tubing to prevent any further addition of CO2. Note: The purpose of this step is to isolate the beaker from the cold flask."

And moreover, nitwit, when dry ice evaporates it cools off, not heats up. They are using beakers with foam insulating lids that are not pressure sealed so there is no pressure increase "increasing the heat" as you so idiotically claim.

The second was introduced by now what was it???? Oh yeah A SODA STREAM in other words a LIQUID form you pinhead!

Your insults are so ironically humorous because you're always wrong and obviously the pinhead yourself. LOL. In the second experiment I showed you in post #167, the CO2 is introduced to the bottle with a piece of commercially available equipment called a Soda Stream that is sometimes used in school labs as a source of fairly pure CO2. They did not add a liquid, "pinhead", they added a gas.

If you are going to try and BS your way through a science discussion best not to do it with a real scientist moron,

That would be good advice for you to follow.

You've certainly made it quite obvious that you are not a real scientist or even close. You are poseur trying desperately to give credence to your pathetic denier cult pseudo-science by claiming to have some knowledge of science that you very clearly lack.

I notice you didn't even try to nitpick that last experimental outline from U of Arizona website. Are you running out of idiotic objections to standard science practices?

 

[westwall]

Duh! indeed. You are such a phony. What "solid form", nitwit? They are not putting dry ice in the bottle, they are using a source of CO2 gas. The pressures in the bottles are the same.


That is total horseshit, retard. You have no idea what you're talking about. These experiments, and there are many of them summarized on various educational websites, each one with slightly different procedures and setups, demonstrate a simple principle. Certain gases absorb infrared radiation and, BTW, argon is not one of them (so you're wrong about that too). Thousands of physics teachers in many countries at the high school level and college and university level, have used these experiments in their classes. But you're the only one to spot the "flaws". LOL. You are an ignorant little shithead with no real knowledge of science or physics, despite your ridiculous pretensions to the contrary.

Here's another similar experiment from Arizona State University with a different setup.

GREENHOUSE EFFECT IN THE CLASSROOM: A PROJECT- AND LABORATORY-BASED CURRICULUM

I chose argon specifically because it is inert you dolt.

You said you "could introduce pure Argon into your experiments and get the same result" and that is not true. CO2 demonstrably absorbs more energy from the light source and gets hotter.


You are such a ridiculous bluffer, moron. In the first experiment I showed you in post #153, the dry ice is placed in the 125-mL Erlenmeyer flask and conveyed through a tube to the 500-mL beaker as the experiment procedure clearly states and which you would understand if you were capable of understanding science which you're not.
"Equipment Setup

1. Carefully take the rubber stopper out of the Erlenmeyer flask, put several pieces of dry ice into the flask, and put the stopper back into the flask.

2. When the carbon dioxide concentration levels off, put the clamp on the tubing to prevent any further addition of CO2. Note: The purpose of this step is to isolate the beaker from the cold flask."

And moreover, nitwit, when dry ice evaporates it cools off, not heats up. The experimental instructions say to "fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide, screw the top on" so there is no pressure increase "increasing the heat" as you so idiotically claim.

The second was introduced by now what was it???? Oh yeah A SODA STREAM in other words a LIQUID form you pinhead!

Your insults are so ironically humorous because you're always wrong and obviously the pinhead yourself. LOL. In the second experiment I showed you in post #167, the CO2 is introduced to the bottle with a piece of commercially available equipment called a Soda Stream that is sometimes used in school labs as a source of fairly pure CO2. They did not add a liquid, "pinhead", they added a gas.

If you are going to try and BS your way through a science discussion best not to do it with a real scientist moron,

That would be good advice for you to follow.

You've certainly made it quite obvious that you are not a real scientist or even close. You are poseur trying desperately to give credence to your pathetic denier cult pseudo-science by claiming to have some knowledge of science that you very clearly lack.

I notice you didn't even try to nitpick that last experimental outline from U of Arizona website. Are you running out of idiotic objections to standard science practices?

OK pinhead I will make it simple enough that you can understand. The CO2 is forced into the flask thereby increasing the pressure inside said flask via thermal expansion as the CO2 bubbles off of the dry ice it first fills the parent flask then is forced into the next flask increasing the pressure inside. This in turn doubles or triples the amount of molecules inside BOTH flasks and the resultant increase in pressure causes the temp to rise....you are putting more matter into the CO2 system than into the regular system...do you not see that?

 

[RollingThunder]

I chose argon specifically because it is inert you dolt.

You said you "could introduce pure Argon into your experiments and get the same result" and that is not true. CO2 demonstrably absorbs more energy from the light source and gets hotter.


You are such a ridiculous bluffer, moron. In the first experiment I showed you in post #153, the dry ice is placed in the 125-mL Erlenmeyer flask and conveyed through a tube to the 500-mL beaker as the experiment procedure clearly states and which you would understand if you were capable of understanding science which you're not.
"Equipment Setup

1. Carefully take the rubber stopper out of the Erlenmeyer flask, put several pieces of dry ice into the flask, and put the stopper back into the flask.

2. When the carbon dioxide concentration levels off, put the clamp on the tubing to prevent any further addition of CO2. Note: The purpose of this step is to isolate the beaker from the cold flask."

And moreover, nitwit, when dry ice evaporates it cools off, not heats up. The experimental instructions say to "fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide, screw the top on" so there is no pressure increase "increasing the heat" as you so idiotically claim.



Your insults are so ironically humorous because you're always wrong and obviously the pinhead yourself. LOL. In the second experiment I showed you in post #167, the CO2 is introduced to the bottle with a piece of commercially available equipment called a Soda Stream that is sometimes used in school labs as a source of fairly pure CO2. They did not add a liquid, "pinhead", they added a gas.

If you are going to try and BS your way through a science discussion best not to do it with a real scientist moron,

That would be good advice for you to follow.

You've certainly made it quite obvious that you are not a real scientist or even close. You are poseur trying desperately to give credence to your pathetic denier cult pseudo-science by claiming to have some knowledge of science that you very clearly lack.

I notice you didn't even try to nitpick that last experimental outline from U of Arizona website. Are you running out of idiotic objections to standard science practices?

OK pinhead I will make it simple enough that you can understand. The CO2 is forced into the flask thereby increasing the pressure inside said flask via thermal expansion as the CO2 bubbles off of the dry ice it first fills the parent flask then is forced into the next flask increasing the pressure inside. This in turn doubles or triples the amount of molecules inside BOTH flasks and the resultant increase in pressure causes the temp to rise....you are putting more matter into the CO2 system than into the regular system...do you not see that?

LOLOLOL...you just won't give up your idiotic cult myth no matter how much evidence you see. LOL. A true cultist just like the 'flat earthers'.

Second experiment - they fill the bottle with CO2 from a dispenser and then put the lid on the bottle. "Fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide, screw the top on." No extra pressure.

Moreover in the first experiment the containers were not tightly sealed. There is no way that the pressure is higher than normal. You are grasping at straws. You are an idiot.

In the third experiment, they suggest trying the experiment with no lids on the fish tanks if there is no turbulence in the air in the room to stir up the CO2 which pooled in the bottom of the fish tank because it is heavier than air.

You fail again. Give it up. You know nothing about this subject.

 

[westwall]

You said you "could introduce pure Argon into your experiments and get the same result" and that is not true. CO2 demonstrably absorbs more energy from the light source and gets hotter.


You are such a ridiculous bluffer, moron. In the first experiment I showed you in post #153, the dry ice is placed in the 125-mL Erlenmeyer flask and conveyed through a tube to the 500-mL beaker as the experiment procedure clearly states and which you would understand if you were capable of understanding science which you're not.
"Equipment Setup

1. Carefully take the rubber stopper out of the Erlenmeyer flask, put several pieces of dry ice into the flask, and put the stopper back into the flask.

2. When the carbon dioxide concentration levels off, put the clamp on the tubing to prevent any further addition of CO2. Note: The purpose of this step is to isolate the beaker from the cold flask."

And moreover, nitwit, when dry ice evaporates it cools off, not heats up. The experimental instructions say to "fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide, screw the top on" so there is no pressure increase "increasing the heat" as you so idiotically claim.



Your insults are so ironically humorous because you're always wrong and obviously the pinhead yourself. LOL. In the second experiment I showed you in post #167, the CO2 is introduced to the bottle with a piece of commercially available equipment called a Soda Stream that is sometimes used in school labs as a source of fairly pure CO2. They did not add a liquid, "pinhead", they added a gas.



That would be good advice for you to follow.

You've certainly made it quite obvious that you are not a real scientist or even close. You are poseur trying desperately to give credence to your pathetic denier cult pseudo-science by claiming to have some knowledge of science that you very clearly lack.

I notice you didn't even try to nitpick that last experimental outline from U of Arizona website. Are you running out of idiotic objections to standard science practices?

OK pinhead I will make it simple enough that you can understand. The CO2 is forced into the flask thereby increasing the pressure inside said flask via thermal expansion as the CO2 bubbles off of the dry ice it first fills the parent flask then is forced into the next flask increasing the pressure inside. This in turn doubles or triples the amount of molecules inside BOTH flasks and the resultant increase in pressure causes the temp to rise....you are putting more matter into the CO2 system than into the regular system...do you not see that?

LOLOLOL...you just won't give up your idiotic cult myth no matter how much evidence you see. LOL. A true cultist just like the 'flat earthers'.

Second experiment - they fill the bottle with CO2 from a dispenser and then put the lid on the bottle. "Fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide, screw the top on." No extra pressure.

Moreover in the first experiment the containers were not tightly sealed. There is no way that the pressure is higher than normal. You are grasping at straws. You are an idiot.

In the third experiment, they suggest trying the experiment with no lids on the fish tanks if there is no turbulence in the air in the room to stir up the CO2 which pooled in the bottom of the fish tank because it is heavier than air.

You fail again. Give it up. You know nothing about this subject.

I know enough that every one of your experiments has an outside influence. Experiments are supposed to have no outside influence in order to be robust and valid. Arguing with you is futile...but fun!!

 

[gslack]

Classic pseudo-science manipulative experiment...

They created that experiment to show a desired outcome. They twist the steps and methods until the desired result is achieved, and they call it science......

Why so much BS? Why not just take an air tight aquarium filled with regular air and two or so inches of soil. Then take another and fill it with the same amount of soil and an equivalent amount of air in the first one, only with the second have the CO2 content 40% higher PPM. place both in the Sun for a day and then take temperature readings of the inside air and soil and compare the results....

Why all the nonsense that does nothing but complicate a very simple concept? I can tell you why, because that does not give the desired result...

We ask you several times point blank to show us something like that... And after all this time this is what you come up with? An obvious biased and twisted experiment?

THe fucking nerve of you people now... You have no fucking shame at all... Its not about truth or anything anymore, its about getting your agenda pushed.. Soulless POS's..

 

[saveliberty]

I see rolling Thunder switched science experiments since I totally trashed his first one. Nice job on taking his second attempt to the dumpster westwall and gslack.

States of Matter
There are five main states of matter. Solids, liquids, gases, plasmas, and Bose-Einstein condensates are all different states of matter. Each of these states is also known as a phase. Elements and compounds can move from one phase to another phase when special physical forces are present. One example of those forces is temperature. The phase or state of matter can change when the temperature changes. Generally, as the temperature rises, matter moves to a more active state.

Phase describes a physical state of matter. The key word to notice is physical. Things only move from one phase to another by physical means. If energy is added (like increasing the temperature or increasing pressure) or if energy is taken away (like freezing something or decreasing pressure) you have created a physical change.

Chem4Kids.com: Matter: States of Matter

Just in case Rolling Turd think we made it up. Note source, chem4kids. We'll try to keep it at his level.

 

[RollingThunder]

OK pinhead I will make it simple enough that you can understand. The CO2 is forced into the flask thereby increasing the pressure inside said flask via thermal expansion as the CO2 bubbles off of the dry ice it first fills the parent flask then is forced into the next flask increasing the pressure inside. This in turn doubles or triples the amount of molecules inside BOTH flasks and the resultant increase in pressure causes the temp to rise....you are putting more matter into the CO2 system than into the regular system...do you not see that?

LOLOLOL...you just won't give up your idiotic cult myth no matter how much evidence you see. LOL. A true cultist just like the 'flat earthers'.

Second experiment - they fill the bottle with CO2 from a dispenser and then put the lid on the bottle. "Fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide, screw the top on." No extra pressure.

Moreover in the first experiment the containers were not tightly sealed. There is no way that the pressure is higher than normal. You are grasping at straws. You are an idiot.

In the third experiment, they suggest trying the experiment with no lids on the fish tanks if there is no turbulence in the air in the room to stir up the CO2 which pooled in the bottom of the fish tank because it is heavier than air.

You fail again. Give it up. You know nothing about this subject.

I know enough that every one of your experiments has an outside influence. Experiments are supposed to have no outside influence in order to be robust and valid. Arguing with you is futile...but fun!!

You keep saying that stuff but when you try to name the "outside influences", I've pointed out that you have been wrong in every case. So go ahead and list the "outside influences" in those three experiments that have escaped the notice of thousands of high school and college physics teachers. LOL. You are a nonsensical fruitcake of a troll who doesn't know his ass from his elbow when it comes to actual science. Your cult myth has been destroyed by facts and you are in denial, much the way you are still in denial about the reality of AGW, despite the overwhelming evidence.

 

[gslack]

LOLOLOL...you just won't give up your idiotic cult myth no matter how much evidence you see. LOL. A true cultist just like the 'flat earthers'.

Second experiment - they fill the bottle with CO2 from a dispenser and then put the lid on the bottle. "Fill one of the bottles with carbon dioxide, screw the top on." No extra pressure.

Moreover in the first experiment the containers were not tightly sealed. There is no way that the pressure is higher than normal. You are grasping at straws. You are an idiot.

In the third experiment, they suggest trying the experiment with no lids on the fish tanks if there is no turbulence in the air in the room to stir up the CO2 which pooled in the bottom of the fish tank because it is heavier than air.

You fail again. Give it up. You know nothing about this subject.

I know enough that every one of your experiments has an outside influence. Experiments are supposed to have no outside influence in order to be robust and valid. Arguing with you is futile...but fun!!

You keep saying that stuff but when you try to name the "outside influences", I've pointed out that you have been wrong in every case. So go ahead and list the "outside influences" in those three experiments that have escaped the notice of thousands of high school and college physics teachers. LOL. You are a nonsensical fruitcake of a troll who doesn't know his ass from his elbow when it comes to actual science. Your cult myth has been destroyed by facts and you are in denial, much the way you are still in denial about the reality of AGW, despite the overwhelming evidence.

No trolling blunder you have shown your dishonesty and bullshit all too clearly... You fucked up google boy...... You did a google search for experiments to show a desired outcome in this case CO2 contribution to the greenhouse effect.

You didn't even realize the give away... Your Highlighted words in the article.... yeah when you do a search like that they highlight your keywords..... Nice try google man.... HAHAHAHAHAHA! busted again!

 

[RollingThunder]

I know enough that every one of your experiments has an outside influence. Experiments are supposed to have no outside influence in order to be robust and valid. Arguing with you is futile...but fun!!

You keep saying that stuff but when you try to name the "outside influences", I've pointed out that you have been wrong in every case. So go ahead and list the "outside influences" in those three experiments that have escaped the notice of thousands of high school and college physics teachers. LOL. You are a nonsensical fruitcake of a troll who doesn't know his ass from his elbow when it comes to actual science. Your cult myth has been destroyed by facts and you are in denial, much the way you are still in denial about the reality of AGW, despite the overwhelming evidence.

No trolling blunder you have shown your dishonesty and bullshit all too clearly... You fucked up google boy...... You did a google search for experiments to show a desired outcome in this case CO2 contribution to the greenhouse effect.

You didn't even realize the give away... Your Highlighted words in the article.... yeah when you do a search like that they highlight your keywords..... Nice try google man.... HAHAHAHAHAHA! busted again!

LOLOLOL...jeez, you are soooooo retarded, slack-jawed. I did a search for "greenhouse effect laboratory", like I mentioned before to walleyed. The only thing that is "busted" is your brain, you incredible cretin. You can't refute the experiment that destroys one of your denier cult myths and demonstrates the fact that CO2 absorbs infrared energy, just like the scientists have been saying for over a century, so you grasp for a non-existent straw like this. You are pathetic.

 

[Old Rocks]

None of the people that you are argueing with has shown themselves to have the slightes scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

 

[gslack]

You keep saying that stuff but when you try to name the "outside influences", I've pointed out that you have been wrong in every case. So go ahead and list the "outside influences" in those three experiments that have escaped the notice of thousands of high school and college physics teachers. LOL. You are a nonsensical fruitcake of a troll who doesn't know his ass from his elbow when it comes to actual science. Your cult myth has been destroyed by facts and you are in denial, much the way you are still in denial about the reality of AGW, despite the overwhelming evidence.

No trolling blunder you have shown your dishonesty and bullshit all too clearly... You fucked up google boy...... You did a google search for experiments to show a desired outcome in this case CO2 contribution to the greenhouse effect.

You didn't even realize the give away... Your Highlighted words in the article.... yeah when you do a search like that they highlight your keywords..... Nice try google man.... HAHAHAHAHAHA! busted again!

LOLOLOL...jeez, you are soooooo retarded, slack-jawed. I did a search for "greenhouse effect laboratory", like I mentioned before to walleyed. The only thing that is "busted" is your brain, you incredible cretin. You can't refute the experiment that destroys one of your denier cult myths and demonstrates the fact that CO2 absorbs infrared energy, just like the scientists have been saying for over a century, so you grasp for a non-existent straw like this. You are pathetic.

What happened? i thought you were in the know on this? You tell us we are uninformed and use google to battle actual science all the time.... Yet here you are googling your ass off and trying to pretend its some kind of irrefutable evidence....

Busted! Fucking fraud.....

 

[gslack]

None of the people that you are argueing with has shown themselves to have the slightes scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

Really? Than have you been routinely shown for the liar and propagandist you are? If we are so ignorant, how in the hell are we able to show repeatedly and with such little effort how full of shit your bullshit is?

You got caught lying too many times so you went ands got your propaganda pal to try and save your ass... Well he is failing as bad as you did... nice job, idiot fails so you go get an even bigger idiot....

 

[RollingThunder]

None of the people that you are argueing with has shown themselves to have the slightes scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

Really? Than have you been routinely shown for the liar and propagandist you are? If we are so ignorant, how in the hell are we able to show repeatedly and with such little effort how full of shit your bullshit is?

You got caught lying too many times so you went ands got your propaganda pal to try and save your ass... Well he is failing as bad as you did... nice job, idiot fails so you go get an even bigger idiot....

LOLOLOL...slack-jawed is such a silly delusional troll without a clue. In his own little fantasy world he always is winning every debate but in the real world, he is continually being shown up as a total idiot blowing smoke out of his ass.

 

[gslack]

None of the people that you are argueing with has shown themselves to have the slightes scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

Really? Than have you been routinely shown for the liar and propagandist you are? If we are so ignorant, how in the hell are we able to show repeatedly and with such little effort how full of shit your bullshit is?

You got caught lying too many times so you went ands got your propaganda pal to try and save your ass... Well he is failing as bad as you did... nice job, idiot fails so you go get an even bigger idiot....

LOLOLOL...slack-jawed is such a silly delusional troll without a clue. In his own little fantasy world he always is winning every debate but in the real world, he is continually being shown up as a total idiot blowing smoke out of his ass.

uh-huh.... So...Plan on talking to me or just trying to defend your BS to the rest of the board? Trust me douchebag socko trolls like you get very little attention anyway... They don't care, and only a coward would seek their approval instead of facing his opposition....

 

[ScienceRocks]

If our planet is going to FRY than maybe we should be working on ways to survive instead of trying to pull a rabbit out of our asses, and trying to control something we can't possibly start to control, or understand to be able to control.

How about putting more money into nasa planet finders to find us some earth like planets. Just in case our star starts to grow outwards a little early?
How about going to nuclear, which has no green house gas besides water and is many times more efficient then coal or oil. In which would allow us to go to hydrogen for our fuel. Possibly work on advance fuels and work on making them cost effective.
How about thinking about it and not going crazy about it. Some smart mother fucker will come around and lead us.

How about think of the benefits of opening up a larger percentage of land to food growth than we have now.

If we are smart and our possibly crazy friends in the NOAA are right than we should live through it with flying colors, but instead liberals went to kill our economy and blow our money on stupid idea's that won't do anything towards our betterment.

Time to pull head out of ass and think.

 

[westwall]

None of the people that you are argueing with has shown themselves to have the slightes scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

Hey old faud this is one of the funniest yet! Thanks for the laugh!

BTW on a more serious note what about your hero Dr. Jones declaring there has been no warming for 12 years. What do you have to say about that old man?

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Mail Online


Seems to me the leading proponent of AGW theory (and the recipient of 22 MILLION US TAXPAYER dollars) is backpedalling a bit don't you think?

 

[RollingThunder]

None of the people that you are arguing with has shown themselves to have the slightest scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

Yes, I agree, most of them are the standard trolls culled from the ranks of the ignorant uneducated morons who've been brainwashed by Rush and FauxNews. I'm coming to think some of them however are paid agents of disinformation, probably getting some money from an Exxon secret slush fund. The way a lot of their denier cult blogs and 'think tanks' are funded through anonymous 'donations'. Either way, their pattern is to claim some ridiculous falsehood to be fact and then when scientific evidence is posted debunking their delusion, they either stupidly stick to their lie by posting more opinionated nonsense or they change the subject then, often totally off-topic, but come back later and make the same already debunked claim again, over and over.

I've noticed some of the more insane trolls have a pathological fixation on socks. It doesn't seem possible that they all could have been molested as a child by someone with a sock on their hand but it certainly sometimes seems that way. Even when the mods on some forums get tired of it and tell them that the forum posters are different people posting from different geographical locations, some of the really crazy ones, like the slack-jawed-idiot, won't let it go and still keep muttering about socks. It is hilarious to watch but after a while you realize that it is another one of the tactics the professional trolls are taught and the rest pick up, to divert the thread from the actual topic and spin people out on meaningless inconsequentialities. They have a lot of tactics like that that add nothing to the debate but do waste a lot of time and energy.

I think the funniest thing about the all these trolls is that they are perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect and are always convinced that they are smarter than they actually are and imagine that they know something about science when they are so totally ignorant, but they are too stupid to recognize their own limitations and their glaring intellectual and educational deficiencies. Which explains why they remain convinced that they are smarter and are seeing things clearer that the PhD scientists who've been studying global warming/climate changes for decades.

These trolls in general are a sobering reflection of the sad state of the American educational system and the enormous propaganda influence of broadcast media and the internet.

 

[gslack]

None of the people that you are arguing with has shown themselves to have the slightest scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

Yes, I agree, most of them are the standard trolls culled from the ranks of the ignorant uneducated morons who've been brainwashed by Rush and FauxNews. I'm coming to think some of them however are paid agents of disinformation, probably getting some money from an Exxon secret slush fund. The way a lot of their denier cult blogs and 'think tanks' are funded through anonymous 'donations'. Either way, their pattern is to claim some ridiculous falsehood to be fact and then when scientific evidence is posted debunking their delusion, they either stupidly stick to their lie by posting more opinionated nonsense or they change the subject then, often totally off-topic, but come back later and make the same already debunked claim again, over and over.

I've noticed some of the more insane trolls have a pathological fixation on socks. It doesn't seem possible that they all could have been molested as a child by someone with a sock on their hand but it certainly sometimes seems that way. Even when the mods on some forums get tired of it and tell them that the forum posters are different people posting from different geographical locations, some of the really crazy ones, like the slack-jawed-idiot, won't let it go and still keep muttering about socks. It is hilarious to watch but after a while you realize that it is another one of the tactics the professional trolls are taught and the rest pick up, to divert the thread from the actual topic and spin people out on meaningless inconsequentialities. They have a lot of tactics like that that add nothing to the debate but do waste a lot of time and energy.

I think the funniest thing about the all these trolls is that they are perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect and are always convinced that they are smarter than they actually are and imagine that they know something about science when they are so totally ignorant, but they are too stupid to recognize their own limitations and their glaring intellectual and educational deficiencies. Which explains why they remain convinced that they are smarter and are seeing things clearer that the PhD scientists who've been studying global warming/climate changes for decades.

These trolls in general are a sobering reflection of the sad state of the American educational system and the enormous propaganda influence of broadcast media and the internet.

Yeah, yeah, idiotic trolls from Fauxnews got it..... So done making excuses and pleading to everyone else yet?

let me know when you plan on defending your posts socko...

 

[RollingThunder]

None of the people that you are arguing with has shown themselves to have the slightest scientific education. Rolling Thunder, they will say the most nonsensical things, and then call you a fool for calling them on it. Just trolls, defending their willful ignorance.

Yes, I agree, most of them are the standard trolls culled from the ranks of the ignorant uneducated morons who've been brainwashed by Rush and FauxNews. I'm coming to think some of them however are paid agents of disinformation, probably getting some money from an Exxon secret slush fund. The way a lot of their denier cult blogs and 'think tanks' are funded through anonymous 'donations'. Either way, their pattern is to claim some ridiculous falsehood to be fact and then when scientific evidence is posted debunking their delusion, they either stupidly stick to their lie by posting more opinionated nonsense or they change the subject then, often totally off-topic, but come back later and make the same already debunked claim again, over and over.

I've noticed some of the more insane trolls have a pathological fixation on socks. It doesn't seem possible that they all could have been molested as a child by someone with a sock on their hand but it certainly sometimes seems that way. Even when the mods on some forums get tired of it and tell them that the forum posters are different people posting from different geographical locations, some of the really crazy ones, like the slack-jawed-idiot, won't let it go and still keep muttering about socks. It is hilarious to watch but after a while you realize that it is another one of the tactics the professional trolls are taught and the rest pick up, to divert the thread from the actual topic and spin people out on meaningless inconsequentialities. They have a lot of tactics like that that add nothing to the debate but do waste a lot of time and energy.

I think the funniest thing about the all these trolls is that they are perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect and are always convinced that they are smarter than they actually are and imagine that they know something about science when they are so totally ignorant, but they are too stupid to recognize their own limitations and their glaring intellectual and educational deficiencies. Which explains why they remain convinced that they are smarter and are seeing things clearer that the PhD scientists who've been studying global warming/climate changes for decades.

These trolls in general are a sobering reflection of the sad state of the American educational system and the enormous propaganda influence of broadcast media and the internet.

Yeah, yeah, idiotic trolls from Fauxnews got it..... So done making excuses and pleading to everyone else yet?

let me know when you plan on defending your posts socko...

Defend them against what, troll? You've certainly never been able to refute anything, gsock.

 

[saveliberty]

These faither trolls can't come up with a plausible retort to any of my observations (sciency word huh) about the problems in their "experiments". I can only conclude it is because they have no science background and simply don't see the truth.

All of the critical thinking skills seem to be used by gslack, saveliberty and westwall. Everything from the faithers are talking points.