I thought you guys were "winning"...?

Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
There are a thousand citations that prove there was any wrongdoing from climate scientists over climategate?

"Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct

The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)"

We've been over these points dozens of times in as many different threads on the subject. Where someones financial motivations to enact policy based on pseudoscience is important. The IPCC is not subject to this because it was developed by over 250 different authors from 34 different science institutions all working independent of each other all who reached the exact same conclusion. The IPCC is a compilation of all of those different authors and institutions works, that's how science works. What beenthere cited was one research paper conducted by a man with known ties to the oil industry, effectively rendering the entire study useless because of his financial conflicts of interest.

I know none of this is registering to you, all you hear is what you want to hear, that's fine, but don't blame your ignorance on valid science that is accepted by the vast majority of the rest of the world.

If you knew what science was or how to do it, you would already accept ACC as fact, same with evolution, same with vaccines, etc. Scientifically illiterate people don't accept these things because they don't understand them. Nothing new..



When was the IPCC debuncked?
Click to expand...
Clearly not true, because you are scientifically illiterate and you accept them. So far every single scientific reseach endever you've posted disprove your claims when examined closely. When this is pointed out, you fall back to your favorite arguments of quoting a flawed opinion poll done by a failed cartoonist and calling us scientifically illiterate. I do know "how to do science". In fact, my job tittle is "Scientific Research Specialist". My salary is paid by grants from the Dept. of Energy and my equipment and consumables are paid for by the NSF. We are one of very few agencies who had our NSF funding INCREASED this year. The source of funding of Beenthere's citation is immaterial. You can't refute the research, so you try to dismis it on irrevelent grounds. The source of the co2 absorbtion properties research says half the current concentration of co2 is sufficient to absorb 100% of the narrow band of infra-red it actually absorbs. Therefore, increased co2 levels can not absorb any more infra-red. Remember, the original researcher was trying to find a way of staying the next ice age. He concluded that increasing co2 levels would NOT cause increased retention of heat. But, you know, SCIENCE!!!
 
Last edited:
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
Clearly not true, because you are scientifically illiterate and you accept them. So far every single scientific reseach endever you've posted disprove your claims when examined closely. When this is pointed out, you fall back to your favorite arguments of quoting a flawed opinion poll done by a failed cartoonist and calling us scientifically illiterate. I do know "how to do science". In fact, my job tittle is "Scientific Research Specialist". My salary is paid by grants from the Dept. of Energy and my equipment and consumables are paid for by the NSF. We are one of very few agencies who had our NSF funding INCREASED this year. The source of funding of Beenthere's citation is immaterial. You can't refute the research, so you try to dismis it on irrevelent grounds. The source of the co2 absorbtion properties research says half the current concentration of co2 is sufficient to absorb 100% of the narrow band of infra-red it actually absorbs. Therefore, increased co2 levels can not absorb any more infra-red. Remember, the original researcher was trying to find a way of staying the next ice age. He concluded that increasing co2 levels would NOT cause increased retention of heat. But, you know, SCIENCE!!!
Click to expand...
You are batshit crazy if you think I believe a word of any of that nonsense. Like I said, people who hold the beliefs you espouse don't get into science, and if they do, they don't get far.

Lets go back to 2nd grade science class..

You claim "He concluded that increasing co2 levels would NOT cause increased retention of heat.", right?


If a "scientific research specialist" can't figure something as fundamental as that out, one has to wonder about his integrity..

jahbrudda said:
It does prove that left wing idiots who don't have a mind of their own will sign on to just about any cause, even if it's a petition for the government to reduce sun spots.:lol:
Click to expand...
There are idiots everywhere, does that surprise you?



Still doesn't change the fact that the biggest rally about climate change in history just took place, and Obama and the VP Gaoli made commitments about the future;

"Obama said he met with Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli shortly before his address, and emphasized that as their countries are the two largest emitters, "we have a special responsibility to lead. It's what big nations have to do."

Obama's speech repeated that emphasis, arguing that a new global agreement -- which negotiators are working to complete by the end of 2015 -- should include commitments from all nations. "We can only succeed in combating climate change if we are joined by every nation, developed and developing alike. Nobody gets a pass," Obama said. "It is those emerging economies that are likely to produce more and more carbon emissions in the years to come. Nobody can stand on the sidelines on this issue.

In separate remarks, China's vice premier Zhang reiterated the country's commitment to cutting its carbon intensity by 40 to 45 percent by 2020, and to increasing the share of non-fossil fuels in use there. He also said China would announce "as soon as we can" any additional actions it will take to cut emissions after the year 2020. And while he did not offer a more specific timeline, he said China "will also try to bring about the peaking of total CO2 emissions as early as possible."
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Did I ever say co2 doesn't absorb infra-red? No, I didn't. Jetstream Online School. Yeah, a school run out of some guy's kitchen. Very impressive. But it still doesn't disprove my statement that 100% of the band of infra-red absorbed is already being absorbed and additional co2 has no effect. In fact, it supports my statement. That you think this somehow disproves my statement shows your lack of intelligence. Your rally doesn't add any credence to your position. If anything, the mess your eco-loons left behind demonstrates what a bunch of hypocrites they are. Signing petitions to lower the sun's heat output demonstrates what idiots they are.Yes, China promises to cut co2 emissions. They also promised not to use lead paint on childrens toys, not sell poisened dog food, execute political disidents, commit cyber crime, print counterfeit US currancy, not manipulate their exchange rates, and countless other things. They haven't kept those promises either. So, did you sign the petition to reduce the sun's output?
 
Last edited:
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
You're a conspiracy theorist who believes in a global plot to subvert truth

I'm afraid that's where the conversation ends with you and me, so have a good day, man..
 
Pinworm

Pinworm

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
Gin, somehow you got mind fucked into thinking this is not what is going on. This is exactly how it works and it has come to nothing so far.
-------------
Make alternative fuel a competition with fame and fortune as the carrot. Make the prize enough that our brightest minds may see the risk is worth the reward.
-------------

There are litereal 10s of thousands of grants on this question. The auto industry is spending Billons of their own money on this.

More money does not mean more discoveries. You just have this wrong. It is popular superstition, that this is not the life work of over 1,000,000 people today, hard at it to get an alternative fuel to the market.
Click to expand...
1280344983[1].gif
 
jahbrudda

jahbrudda

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
There are idiots everywhere, does that surprise you?



Still doesn't change the fact that the biggest rally about climate change in history just took place, and Obama and the VP Gaoli made commitments about the future;
Click to expand...
You posted a video of a tea part rally, big fucking deal.

At least they weren't left wing loons signing a petition for the government to control sub spots:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top