Red1966
Well-Known Member
And supersedes logic.
I thought you guys were "winning"...?
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Not sure who he is. One of your leaders??
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
No, for real, who is the biggest name you can offer who denies ACC?
Lets get to the bottom of this!
Lets get to the bottom of this!
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
First off, don't ever call me a liberal, I find it extremely offensive and while I'm certainly an ass hole, I generally only call people stupid or liar or some variation of those. Don't call me liberal. Liberalism is a form of capitalism.
Secondly, no, he didn't link anything worthwhile. I have linked peer reviewed studies and position statements from major scientific institutions. I also linked a Nasa study.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
The bottom line is, you guys got duped.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
That's blasphemy. How dare you question the prophet Al Gore. Infidel!!!!The bottom line is, you guys got duped.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
You understand you're the ones insisting the world is flat, right? The ones still asking for the missing link?The bottom line is, you guys got duped.
And everybody is laughing at you?
You get that, right?
LOL
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
17 Scientists From 11 Countries: Research Confirms That IPCC Climate Models' Flood Predictions Are Spectacular Failure.
Another IPCC climate model prediction fails the ultimate test...it's confirmed that the computer simulations of increased flooding did not materialize...and human CO2 emissions do not cause more and bigger floods.....
Another IPCC climate model prediction fails the ultimate test...it's confirmed that the computer simulations of increased flooding did not materialize...and human CO2 emissions do not cause more and bigger floods.....
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Is that what you're going with?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Dude, you're just embarrassing yourself..
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
OK, stop spamming, give me a moment to look at your citations. You have had plenty of time to review my citations, even if you refused to.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
lol, just wait til you find what I found about the sources... Dude doesn't ever dig, he see's the headline "GLOBAL WARMING IS BULLSHIT!" then posts it...
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
We know, all sources are BS sources unless they support your narrative?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
The chart on post #431 is garbage. It is a denier's interpretation of IPCC data yet it claims IPCC as source. To add insult to injury, the black line is still within predictions and as I told Sketchy Etchy when he linked it, the line representing 2006 denotes actual predictions from retrospect. It is therefore worthless.
One down, three to go.
The list on page #426 is a communication from the senate minority report. If you don't know who the senate minority was during this period, I'll tell you, it was the Republican party. The position is a dispute of consensus and not in any way does it represent a scientific conclusion. This list was compiled by James Inhofe (R-OK) with out consent of the scientists themselves. He has received nearly a million dollars in donations from the coal industry. In an attempt to divorce the science from politics, let's take a closer look at the content. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002211/
A chart entitled "NASA Data: Global Warming Still on “Pause,” Sea Ice Hit Record". All this means is that some newspaper took NASA research and added the title to spin it into denial. As has been repeatedly demonstrated, record sea ice means gains in a single year. We're talking about 2012. The chart actually has no relation what so ever to the sea ice gains but you are quite stupid so what can we expect? Nonetheless, I'll explicate your nonargument. Measuring surface sea ice gains from record lows has been repeatedly demonstrated as a useless measurement. It doesn't represent record low tempuratures as the surface need only reach freezing in order to freeze. Furthermore, it also indicates record melts in the previous season. When one looks at total ice volume loss, it is clear that the ice caps have shrunk drastically. Furthermore, this summer saw record melts in a devastating way. Damning yet again. Three down and 1 to go.
Here we finally have you succeeding by accident. By that I mean, your link was garbage except for the fact that it actually contains a citation. So let's take a look at that. Kundzewicz et al. (2013)
Verdict, you managed to cite one actual scientific study, but because you relied on conservative media outlets, you were fooled into thinking that you were citing actual science. The one scientific study you accientally shared, turned out to not support your argument. You have literally NOTHING!
One down, three to go.
The list on page #426 is a communication from the senate minority report. If you don't know who the senate minority was during this period, I'll tell you, it was the Republican party. The position is a dispute of consensus and not in any way does it represent a scientific conclusion. This list was compiled by James Inhofe (R-OK) with out consent of the scientists themselves. He has received nearly a million dollars in donations from the coal industry. In an attempt to divorce the science from politics, let's take a closer look at the content. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002211/
Pretty damning stuff. The Senate Minority report is garbage. Two down, two to go.
A chart entitled "NASA Data: Global Warming Still on “Pause,” Sea Ice Hit Record". All this means is that some newspaper took NASA research and added the title to spin it into denial. As has been repeatedly demonstrated, record sea ice means gains in a single year. We're talking about 2012. The chart actually has no relation what so ever to the sea ice gains but you are quite stupid so what can we expect? Nonetheless, I'll explicate your nonargument. Measuring surface sea ice gains from record lows has been repeatedly demonstrated as a useless measurement. It doesn't represent record low tempuratures as the surface need only reach freezing in order to freeze. Furthermore, it also indicates record melts in the previous season. When one looks at total ice volume loss, it is clear that the ice caps have shrunk drastically. Furthermore, this summer saw record melts in a devastating way. Damning yet again. Three down and 1 to go.
Here we finally have you succeeding by accident. By that I mean, your link was garbage except for the fact that it actually contains a citation. So let's take a look at that. Kundzewicz et al. (2013)
^^I don't see anything about disputing CO2 as the cause for climate change in there.^^
Verdict, you managed to cite one actual scientific study, but because you relied on conservative media outlets, you were fooled into thinking that you were citing actual science. The one scientific study you accientally shared, turned out to not support your argument. You have literally NOTHING!
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
More Than 1000 International ScientistsWe know, all sources are BS sources unless they support your narrative?
Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming
Claims Scientists Continue to Debunk Fading
“Consensus” in 2008 & 2009 & 2010
http://cfact.org/pdf/2010_Senate_Minority_Report.pdf
Hmm.. "climate depot" huh.. wonder what that is, lets investigate...
Looks like it was founded by a guy named Marc Morano.. who's he?
Born in Virginia, has a BS in political science, a former employee of Jim Inhofe, then after that began working for Rush Limbaugh from 92-96... hmm.. He was one of the people to fabricate 'climategate', lets see what else we can find..
"The list presented by Morano in his minority 2007-2008 report has been criticized by Joseph J. Romm for including a significant number of people who are not sufficiently well-qualified to assess climate science, such as author Ray Kurzweil and a number of television meteorologists, such as Steve Baskerville, as well as scientists whose expertise is in geomagnetism. In 2009, Joseph Romm wrote that Morano was "unquotable and uncitable," adding "Besides his penchant for smear, he just makes stuff up..."
At the end of 2012 Media Matters for America named Morano the "Climate Change Misinformer of the Year.""
Lol, so as if all of that wasn't bad enough...
I wonder where the dude gets his funding...
"Climate Depot.com run by Morano, is funded by Richard Mellon Scaife, known for his financial support of conservative public policy organizations. CFACT's tax filings list Morano as the most highly paid member of the organisation.
Hmm, who's Richard Mellon Scaife?... lets find out, together
"Richard Mellon Scaife (July 3, 1932 – July 4, 2014) was an American billionaire, a principal heir to the Mellon banking, oil, and aluminum fortune, and the owner and publisher of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. In 2005, Scaife was number 238 on the Forbes 400, with a personal fortune of $1.2 billion. By 2013, Scaife had dropped to number 371 on the listing, with a personal fortune of $1.4 billion.
Scaife was also known for his financial support of conservative public policy organizations over the past four decades. He provided support for conservative and libertarian causes in the United States, mostly through the private, nonprofit foundations he controlled: the Sarah Scaife Foundation, Carthage Foundation, and Allegheny Foundation, and until 2001, the Scaife Family Foundation, now controlled by his daughter Jennie and son David."
LOL
So in conclusion, you cited a "study" conducted by a guy with a BS in political science who interviewed people with no scientific backgrounds, that was funded by a billionaire tied to the oil industry.
Here's a video of the douchnozzle trying to go up against Bill Nye and getting totally fucking owned;