The Warmergate Scandal

[☭proletarian☭]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg[/ame]

 

[saveliberty]

I heard Al Gore wrote a peom. Thought I'd return the favor:

Al Gore became a warmer whore
Long long before
A million degrees
He thought the core.

Reduce your carbon footprint
If we ever hope to dent
Melting the ice caps
And money for me print.

Cap and trade Gore does rave
The planet we must save
Help them grow clean industry
In places they still live in a cave.

Scientists who have tricked the data
What diference does that matta
We know our science is all junk
Just look at our results Mista!

Many times Al Gore must have thought
How long can I go and not get caught
But still the money I can rake
Due to what governments have bought.

Soon Al Gore will be just a joke
Many will want to take a poke
What will he do and say
He already invests in coke.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"A growing menace lurks in the seas"
by Michael Carey
associated press

"As ocean waters grow warmer, massive swarms of jellyfish are invading new areas - with potentially disasterous consequences"

Those of you who wish to remain ignorant will ignore this and the many, many other authorative articles/studies on the dangers of cllmate change. Enjoy your bliss while it lasts.

 

[Oddball]

None of that proves causality, pisswillie...Speaking of ignorant.

 

[Si modo]

"A growing menace lurks in the seas"
by Michael Carey
associated press

"As ocean waters grow warmer, massive swarms of jellyfish are invading new areas - with potentially disasterous consequences"

Those of you who wish to remain ignorant will ignore this and the many, many other authorative articles/studies on the dangers of cllmate change. Enjoy your bliss while it lasts.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Idiot.

 

[Wry Catcher]

None of that proves causality, pisswillie...Speaking of ignorant.

Proves? Who suggested proof? It's simply one more piece of a puzzle. A piece that helps move a hypothesis forward. Unlike denial and magical thinking, it's a method used to understand the world around us. I'm getting sleepy, very sleepy...damn, you're good - boring really put me under.

 

[Oddball]

It's a big fat nothing, other than fodder for warmists to illogically claim that somehow man is to blame.

The "magical thinking" retort is non sequitur and irrelevant....But not unexpected from someone whose limit of "thinking" is the strawman argument.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'm getting sleepier and sleepier...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Si modo]

None of that proves causality, pisswillie...Speaking of ignorant.

Proves? Who suggested proof? It's simply one more piece of a puzzle. A piece that helps move a hypothesis forward. ....

Only to the illogical does a post hoc ergo propter hoc 'point' do anything of the sort.

Dilettantes.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"A growing menace lurks in the seas"
by Michael Carey
associated press

"As ocean waters grow warmer, massive swarms of jellyfish are invading new areas - with potentially disasterous consequences"

Those of you who wish to remain ignorant will ignore this and the many, many other authorative articles/studies on the dangers of cllmate change. Enjoy your bliss while it lasts.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Idiot.

No, not a conclusion, evidence offered. Simple as that. No less simple than an ad hominem attack.

 

[Si modo]

"A growing menace lurks in the seas"
by Michael Carey
associated press

"As ocean waters grow warmer, massive swarms of jellyfish are invading new areas - with potentially disasterous consequences"

Those of you who wish to remain ignorant will ignore this and the many, many other authorative articles/studies on the dangers of cllmate change. Enjoy your bliss while it lasts.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Idiot.

No, not a conclusion, evidence offered. Simply as that. No less simple than an ad hominem attack.

Evidence of a correlation, thus post hoc ergo propter hoc which does nothing to support a hypothesis.

Idiot.

 

[Wry Catcher]

None of that proves causality, pisswillie...Speaking of ignorant.

Proves? Who suggested proof? It's simply one more piece of a puzzle. A piece that helps move a hypothesis forward. ....

Only to the illogical does a post hoc ergo propter hoc 'point' do anything of the sort.

Dilettantes.

Would the claim that the policies of Bush&Co prevented another terrorist attack be considered a logical fallacy?

 

[Si modo]

Proves? Who suggested proof? It's simply one more piece of a puzzle. A piece that helps move a hypothesis forward. ....

Only to the illogical does a post hoc ergo propter hoc 'point' do anything of the sort.

Dilettantes.

Would the claim that the policies of Bush&Co prevented another terrorist attack be considered a logical fallacy?

When all else fails upstairs, deflect from the topic?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

sm missed the poit...

 

[Wry Catcher]

Only to the illogical does a post hoc ergo propter hoc 'point' do anything of the sort.

Dilettantes.

Would the claim that the policies of Bush&Co prevented another terrorist attack be considered a logical fallacy?

When all else fails upstairs, deflect from the topic?

No, it's quite on point. Now your's is the red herring.

 

[Si modo]

Would the claim that the policies of Bush&Co prevented another terrorist attack be considered a logical fallacy?

When all else fails upstairs, deflect from the topic?

No, it's quite on point. Now your's is the red herring.

GWB and Muslim terrorism is related to the topic of the climate scandal.

You are nuts.

 

[Oddball]

Proves? Who suggested proof? It's simply one more piece of a puzzle. A piece that helps move a hypothesis forward. ....

Only to the illogical does a post hoc ergo propter hoc 'point' do anything of the sort.

Dilettantes.

Would the claim that the policies of Bush&Co prevented another terrorist attack be considered a logical fallacy?

Yes it would, ergo your claim is also fallacious.

Case closed.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Back to the warmers. Link below ot an interesting article. I truly relate to the frustration the scientists have for the whacko anti-global warming people. The E-mails of certain climate scientists reveal a screening data from opponents and actually talked about hiding evidence -- but the emails simply do not support accusations that global-warming science is a fake or a hoax.

http://www.freep.com/article/200912...-show-science-not-faked-but-not-pretty-either

 

[Si modo]

Only to the illogical does a post hoc ergo propter hoc 'point' do anything of the sort.

Dilettantes.

Would the claim that the policies of Bush&Co prevented another terrorist attack be considered a logical fallacy?

Yes it would, ergo your claim is also fallacious.

Case closed.

He's not too bright.

 

[Oddball]

Back to the warmers. Link below ot an interesting article. I truly relate to the frustration the scientists have for the whacko anti-global warming people. The E-mails of certain climate scientists reveal a screening data from opponents and actually talked about hiding evidence -- but the emails simply do not support accusations that global-warming science is a fake or a hoax.

http://www.freep.com/article/200912...-show-science-not-faked-but-not-pretty-either

Right...The inner circle of the warmist cult filtering out and hiding contradictory evidence, and advising colleagues on how to do so themselves, is no evidence whatsoever of a hoax.