TWO more Global Warming issues

[Old Rocks]

encourage you to investigate the methods of John Cook's survey which led to this 97% figure.

Well, I haven't relied on Cook's survey.....My more objective source is The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)..which is a UN sponsored panel.

Oh goody! Have you read their emails?

Tell me guy. Suppose there is a murder and during the trial, we find that the prosecutor and the lead detective have exchanged emails discussing planting evidence to support the case against the accused.

Let's put you in the judge's chair up front. Would you elect to continue the trial or would you remove the prosecutor and all evidence gathered by the detective?


Why then, for God's sake, do you still believe IPCC?

Still no Liberal will touch this...
I bet half y'all still believe bill clinton "didn't have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinski."

I'm not really a tax and spend liberal. I'd say I'm a social liberal and an environmentalist. But, I'm a realist. There's no way you can label the IPCC 'objective'. Their purpose is to recommend policy to governments. While consensus is not important in science, it is essential to politics.

An IPCC report generally begins with an executive directive, such as "Predict the apocalyptic consequences if mankind fails to give the UN the power to force shit down people's throats". I'm exaggerating, but only slightly. Then you've got one or more working groups of scientists who volunteer to work on the issue. Then you've got economists, political scientists and government representatives who edit the science so that the final report is uniform and non-ambiguous. And, there's some give and take back and forth between the groups, etc..

But, the IPCC is a political organization first and foremost, not a body of pure science.

No fellow, you are not an environmentalist, you are trying to be a Trojan Horse. And failing. Obviously you are damned ignorant of the environment, and also of the science behind the warming of the globe.

 

[Treeshepherd]

No fellow, you are not an environmentalist, you are trying to be a Trojan Horse. And failing. Obviously you are damned ignorant of the environment, and also of the science behind the warming of the globe.

I used to be a forest activist and went to jail defending old growth redwoods. I'm concerned about deforestation. I'm highly concerned about chemical pollution. I'm concerned about wildlife. I'm into non-consumerism and simple living. Frankly, I think we need to stop burning oil as quickly as we can, but not because of CO2.

CO2 should be at the bottom of everyone's list of concerns. Instead, it's at the very top.

 

[Ernie S.]

Integrity of the scientists demolished? LOL. All that has been demolished is your credibility. And what has been established is the fact that you are willfully ignorant.

So willful manipulation of data and conspiracy to arrive at predetermined results establishes credibility?

OK. Yours is established as non-existent.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Because without said adjustment, the graph is meaningless.

You're saying temperature of the earth is meaningless? That's crazy.

Translation:
You know you have no idea whatsoever what the chart looks like once you take away natural changes in termp
Not surprisingly, you also have no idea why this invalidates any point you try to make with is.
But, being a zealot, you don't care -- you have your faith and you will stick to it.

Given I already did so, with several references

This is a lie, as you know that everything you posted is based on induction and inference.

So... again... tell us what you have, other than inference and induction, that supports your claim that the recent 5000 years of cooling would have lasted another 20,000 years.

Now, given I've answered all your questions, answer mine. What's your theory of warming that explains all of the observed evidence?

1: You are tasked with proving your claim; no one needs to disprove it or present an alternative.
2: You have not proven your claim.

Keep whining, zealot -- your intellectual betters are happy with their useful idiot.

 

[Billy_Bob]

THE OWNEROUS IS ON YOU TO PROVE. You made the statements you provide the facts to support them.

Using far left wing talking points sites such as think progress is a fools errand as almost 100% of what they print is fabrication or extreme exaggeration.

ON to your fabrications/exaggerations... The 800,000 leak was contained and cleaned up just as the 63,000 gallon leak was. Had you read the IEA reports you would have noted the spills had minimal impact on the surroundings and wildlife. They were 100% cleaned up and mitigated.

Had you read the IEA reports and not the made up drivel from Think Progress you would also know that semi accidents and breaches of tankers of oils and gas far out weigh the sums. (because they are limited to 10,000-20,000 gallon potentials they are classified differently) Its funny how you alarmist tell only half the truth and expect others to ferret out your lies or hope we dont and allow the lies to stand.

...and THAT is why it is really "a fool's errand" to ever cite anything to right wingers and closeted tea baggers....... like you....

The question raised by you and a fellow nitwit was about WHICH mode of transporting oil caused the most damage......rail or pipeline......
The A-political Eskimos. Haidas, Inuits, etc. have a different take on what pipeline spillages cause to the environment....but YOU "think" that you know better.

As I stated before I don't give a crap about what you and your fellow nay-sayers spew.

For right wing, tea baggers the WHOLE scientific community throughout the world is "wrong"......they rather rely on the "noted" scientists like Hannity Limbaugh and Beck to tell them what they should think. Fuck them.

Have fun being laughed at by the entire planet for the rest of your life. I hope the emotional affirmation you get from your fellow cultists here will make the years of humiliation bearable.

You know, debating with idiots is a waste of cyberspace....Don't bother; ultimately they're worthless souls and partisan hacks.

A partisan hack to the end. Instead of presenting facts you resort to Ad homenim and belittling, showing that you have lost the argument.

Your right in one area, trying to debate you two fools is a pointless endeavor. Your ignorance and arrogance are blinding for you.

 

[skookerasbil]

Integrity of the scientists demolished? LOL. All that has been demolished is your credibility. And what has been established is the fact that you are willfully ignorant.

Ray.....clearly the integrity of the science is diminished. Its not even debatable. When you go around screwing with the data sets all the time, its going to take a toll. Doesn't really sit well with the whole "science is settled" jargon. And lets face it.....the polls are sobering for the climate science community in 2015. People just aren't worried about global warming anymore and the levels of concern continue to plummet......since 2007, falling like a stone. Theres a problem when the only people who believe in the integrity of these climate scientists are the hard core AGW alarmist crowd only.


If the current science is having zero effect on public policy, clearly, the current science is viewed with lots and lots of suspicion by the public...............these people are largely looked at as snake oil salesmen.

 

[mamooth]

Translation:
You know you have no idea whatsoever what the chart looks like once you take away natural changes in termp

So?

All I did was use that graph to point out there was warming. I never used it to point out there was human-caused warming. That was solely your weird fixation. I used other data to point out there was human-caused warming.

Not surprisingly, you also have no idea why this invalidates any point you try to make with is.

No, as only point I ever attempted to make with it was that there was warming, and the graph proves that well. You look quite dishonest for fixating on that graph and ignoring everything else. But then, you're just using it as an excuse to run from questions. You use everything as an excuse to run. Your cowardice is basically your defining feature.

But, being a zealot, you don't care -- you have your faith and you will stick to it.

You get so pissy when you fail. It's hilarious.

This is a lie, as you know that everything you posted is based on induction and inference.

All predictive science is based on induction and inference, so everyone is laughing at your dishonest double standard. After all, I don't see you sniveling about tomorrow's weather report because it's based on induction and inference. Those are just more buzzwords you use to excuse running away.

1: You are tasked with proving your claim; no one needs to disprove it or present an alternative.

And I've done so. You lying doesn't change that.

Now, let's go over how science works.

If a theory explains all the observed data correctly, and no other theory does, then that theory will be the accepted theory.

Global warming theory explains all the observed data correctly. No other theory does. Hence, it is the accepted theory.

If you want to change that, you have to do more than whine at ever-higher volumes. You have to present an alternate theory that explains the observed data correctly. But you've been too gutless to even try, so everyone is laughing at you.

 

[skookerasbil]

Since most right wingers will state, "gee, I was cold last January, therefore there CANNOT be any global warming..." debating this issue with them is tantamount to a chess game with one's dog.

But in 2015 s0n, the debate is nothing more than an internet hobby. In the real world, progressives are losing HUGE because the science isn't mattering. There has been zero significant climate change legislation in the past 9 years and Cap and Trade is as dead as a doornail. The worldwide carbon trading market - dead. The whole warming debate is stoopid at this point.........nobody cares. The Chinese water torture methods of the alarmists have impressed about 117 people. Short of babes waterskiing on an Alaskan lake in mid-January for 3 weeks, back to the chess game with the dog s0n!!

 

[Ernie S.]

Mantooth has done all the research. The science is settled.

 

[nat4900]

In the real world, progressives are losing HUGE because the science isn't mattering

Of course you DO know (or should know) what the opposite of the term "progressives" is, don't you?

 

[Ernie S.]

In the real world, progressives are losing HUGE because the science isn't mattering

Of course you DO know (or should know) what the opposite of the term "progressives" is, don't you?

Yes. Of course. The opposite of "progressive" is "patriot".

 

[nat4900]

Yes. Of course. The opposite of "progressive" is "patriot".

You forgot to the other adjective before "patriot"....that is, "DELUSIONAL"

 

[nat4900]

Yes. Of course. The opposite of "progressive" is "patriot".

 

[skookerasbil]

Yes. Of course. The opposite of "progressive" is "patriot".

You forgot to the other adjective before "patriot"....that is, "DELUSIONAL"

Whatever you say s0n!!!


[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/pew-report-climate-change.jpg.html][/URL]















[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/burger%20king.jpg.html][/URL]

 

[nat4900]

Yes. Of course. The opposite of "progressive" is "patriot".

You forgot to the other adjective before "patriot"....that is, "DELUSIONAL"

Whatever you say s0n!!!


[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/pew-report-climate-change.jpg.html'][/URL]















[URL='http://[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/burger%20king.jpg.html][IMG]http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/burger%20king.jpg[/IMG][/URL]'][URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/burger%20king.jpg.html'][/URL][/URL]

[URL='http://[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/burger%20king.jpg.html][IMG]http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/burger%20king.jpg[/IMG][/URL]']


If you had a few more brain cells you too would note that number 4 in the priority list is related to global warming....but, don't worry about it....just go play with your guns and learn whatever you need to know from FOX.
[/URL]

 

[Muhammed]

Bottom line is that the AWG cultists have no evidence whatsoever to back up their ridiculous doomsday scenarios.


They should all just pull the purple cloths over their heads and off themselves.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Translation:
You know you have no idea whatsoever what the chart looks like once you take away natural changes in termp

So?
All I did was use that graph to point out there was warming. I never used it to point out there was human-caused warming. That was solely your weird fixation. I used other data to point out there was human-caused warming.

Nothing here changes the fact that until you can back out changes in temp caused from natural variations, you cannot prove any sort of human-caused warming.
This chart, any chart -- matters not.

This is a lie, as you know that everything you posted is based on induction and inference.

All predictive science is based on induction and inference....

And so, cannot be used to -prove- anything -- and so, you have proven nothing.
Refusing to accept this, you take in on faith.
Like a good zealot.

You based your argument on the idea that the earth should have cooled for another 20,000 years. Until you -prove- this, your argument cannot be shown sound.

 

[M14 Shooter]

In the real world, progressives are losing HUGE because the science isn't mattering

Of course you DO know (or should know) what the opposite of the term "progressives" is, don't you?

Freedom. Liberty. Personal responsibility. Choice. Self-determination.

 

[M14 Shooter]

[
If you had a few more brain cells you too would note that number 4 in the priority list is related to global warming

Yes... like Marx, you believe that people will be more accepting of your l"progressive" ideas and polices, once they are correctly indoctrinated... er... educated... by the state.

 

[nat4900]

Yes... like Marx, you believe that people will be more accepting of your l"progressive" ideas and polices, once they are correctly indoctrinated... er... educated... by the state.

Stick to Groucho Marx......your ignorance of political structures is evident...Just go on waving little Chinese-made, US flags to make you feel more "patriotic."