Upgrade your Jackets Ice Age Comin

[MuyLocoNC]

Cite some scientists. While you're at it, cite them talking about legislation. Last time you cited NASA, we all had a good laugh at you.

Actually, we watched try to explain how a conclusion that is less than 50% likely is an incontrovertible fact. I'm still laughing my ass off at that stupidity.

Despite all the Eco-loon howling, how much sweeping MMGW legislation has been passed to date? Whoops. A few bucks to research a plan to train solar panel repairmen that no one is hiring. You sure got me there.

Aww, does your tummy hurt? Liberal-inability-to-ram-suicidal-legislation-down-the-throats-of-the-populace syndrome got you feeling blue? Buck up little camper, Summer is right around the corner and you can bleat about the heat until your life feels complete.

 

[abandonconflict]

Also, I never said I accept or deny anything about globular warming. I made it pretty clear I don't know.

Yet you use fallacious appeal to ridicule arguments like "build an ark". So you don't have a stance on it, but you argue against it. Kinda like how you say you don't support pedophilia, but you go on and on about how children can consent to being paid for sex...

 

[abandonconflict]

Actually, we watched try to explain how a conclusion that is less than 50% likely is a incontrovertible fact.

NASA, did not, at any time, claim that it was less than 50% likely that 2014 was the hottest year on record. The article you allude to has the header "Ranking of Record Years" which is why you're a mouth breather.

What NASA and NOAA in fact claimed was that 2014 was beyond a shadow of a doubt in their conclusions based on scientific research, the hottest year on record.

Again, idiot, try your damnedest to understand "ranking of record years".

 

[MuyLocoNC]

NASA, did not at any time in history claim that it was less than 50% likely that 2014 was the hottest year on record. The article you allude to has the header "Ranking of Record Years" which is why you're a mouth breather.

What NASA and NOAA in fact claimed was that 2014 was beyond a shadow of a doubt in their conclusions based on scientific research, the hottest year on record.

Again, idiot, try your damnedest to understand "ranking of record years.

It doesn't matter how much word salad you toss, just because it's the highest ranked, doesn't change that pesky ~38% probability. We're less uncertain that this year was the hottest than we're uncertain the other years were the hottest, so dat makes it a fact, Jack.

Too stupid for words. Still.

 

[Rob Roy]

Yet you use fallacious appeal to ridicule arguments like "build an ark". So you don't have a stance on it, but you argue against it. Kinda like how you say you don't support pedophilia, but you go on and on about how children can consent to being paid for sex...

A person can recognize that an act is reprehensible and at the same time also recognize some of the people that participate in it may be doing so on a consensual basis. Do you deny that?

You never offered a rebuttal to that did you or explained how that isn't possible. Instead you went for the sensational and tried to declare me a pervert because that fit your game plan better. Observing a characteristic is not the same as embracing a characteristic is it genius?

If you build an Ark as well as you support yourself, the beaches will be flooded with the carcasses of all the baby critters.
Baby killer!!! baby killer !!!!! You support mass extinction!!!!

 

[abandonconflict]

It doesn't matter how much word salad you toss, just because it's the highest ranked, doesn't change that pesky ~38%. We're less uncertain that this year was the hottest than we're uncertain the other years were the hottest, so dat makes it a fact, Jack.

Too stupid for words. Still.

That's how far up your ass your head is.

Just one last time, RANKING OF RECORD YEARS. Look at the picture real close and long and look at which years are record setting years, and then rank them. The higher the rank (expressed in percentage) the hotter the year.

The reason it doesn't all add up to 100% is because the picture ain't big enough, precious.

 

[abandonconflict]

A person can recognize that an act is reprehensible and at the same time also recognize some of the people that participate in it may be doing so on a consensual basis.

Wait, so you're saying that victims of pedophilia are actually pedophiles since they consensually participate in pedophilia.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

It doesn't even matter if I were to suffer a major head injury and accept your nitwittery, it still wouldn't amount to shit since it only goes back as far as "on record".

Meaningless, even if they were certain.

 

[Rob Roy]

Wait, so you're saying that victims of pedophilia are actually pedophiles since they consensually participate in pedophilia.

No. I started off by saying for there to be a victim, somebody applied force or coercion in the absent of actual consent etc. My whole point to bucky boy when I presented his fling with the badman months ago was to get him to discuss what actual consent means. I fucked with him, because he has a long history of fucking with me. Your crew created the rest with both of your hands in your pants.

I'm saying you also have dwelled on this topic, but refuse to answer any questions about how you inferred that a person who discusses something also can be alleged to support that same something.

In other words, like property rights, the only way you appear to want to discuss anything is first to conflate and then recast the other persons point of view Captain Strawman.

I've concluded when you are confronted by a superior argument in general, you run for the cheetohs and sob.

What is property and who can own it? See? I win again!!!

 

[abandonconflict]

Maybe you don't understand that if it was a straightforward ranking of years that wasn't based purely on the percentage of probability, they wouldn't have used fucking PROBABILITY in the header of the chart you vast idiot.

No, I assure you that I understand it, since I also read the study. But let's go nice and slow since your head is so hopelessly lodged in your sphincter. If 2014 was not the hottest year ranked at 48% according to NOAA, than 2010 was since 2010 ranked second, at 18%.

You're saying that NOAA thinks 2010 was hotter than 2014, as opposed to what NOAA actually said which is that 2014 was definitely the hottest year on record.

Or maybe you think NASA is claiming that 1998 was hotter than 2014.

 

[abandonconflict]

No. I started off by saying for there to be a victim, somebody applied force or coercion in the absent of actual consent etc.

Right, so you're saying that children can consent to sex for payment. So I understood you quite clearly.

 

[spandy]

What will they sell tomorrow?

 

[abandonconflict]

Meaningless, even if they were certain.

So now you are backpedaling and admitting that NASA and NOAA indeed conclude firmly that 2014 was the hottest year on record and that therefore you were just completely full of shit when you said that they claimed otherwise. So you also therefore admit that when you made a thread to cite NASA and NOAA as source for your arguments against the actual science those organizations were publishing that you were just being a mouth breather with your head up your ass, got it.

 

[abandonconflict]

What will they sell tomorrow?

Time magazine is worth fuck all. Hitler was once Time Magazine's man of the year. Try peer reviewed research.

 

[Rob Roy]

Right, so you're saying that children can consent to sex for payment. So I understood you quite clearly.

I'm saying as a "child" (young teen) I consented to sex with an older female. She didn't pay me, though. See what is possible if you'd only get out of your moms basement? I find nonconsensual human interactions reprehensible, like receiving stolen money.

I'm also saying you could type faster if you'd take one of those hands out of your pants.

 

[abandonconflict]

I'm saying as a "child" (young teen) I consented to sex with an older female.

This is not possible since you're a cheetoh fingered virgin wearing a fedora who just finished reading The Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand. Even if it were true, your older sister is a pervert for molesting you when you only had a couple hairs on your neck.

 

[Rob Roy]

This is not possible since you're a cheetoh fingered virgin wearing a fedora who just finished reading The Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand. Even if it were true, your older sister is a pervert for molesting you when you only had a couple hairs on your neck.

If you cared you would have worked in rape and slavery....but altogether not too bad for typing with your nose while grasping your miniature manhood tightly with both hands while stroking to a lit shrine of Justin Bieber.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

No, I assure you that I understand it, since I also read the study. But let's go nice and slow since your head is so hopelessly lodged in your sphincter. If 2014 was not the hottest year ranked at 48% according to NOAA, than 2010 was since 2010 ranked second, at 18%.

You're saying that NOAA thinks 2010 was hotter than 2014, as opposed to what NOAA actually said which is that 2014 was definitely the hottest year on record.

Or maybe you think NASA is claiming that 1998 was hotter than 2014.

No, I'm CLEARLY saying its a ranking of probability. If they could claim what your trying to claim, they wouldn't have used percentages at all. If they could say it was incontrovertible fact, as you stupidly do, they would have ranked them without approximate percentages of probability. They are only less uncertain of their number one pick than the others. They will NOT say what you claim, because they know they could be wrong.

 

[abandonconflict]

Try to keep up Skippy.

So you are in fact saying that NASA and NOAA do not claim that 2014 was unequivocally the hottest year on record and you cite as evidence of said claim the data represented by the following image which I will post again:

Am I keeping up?

Have you any clue what "Ranking of Record Years" means?

 

[MuyLocoNC]

So you are in fact saying that NASA and NOAA do not claim that 2014 was unequivocally the hottest year on record and you cite as evidence of said claim the data represented by the following image which I will post again:

Am I keeping up?

Have you any clue what "Ranking of Record Years" means?

Have you any clue what "Probability of warmest year" means?

I see "Ranking of Record Years is Sensitive to Methodology and Coverage". Funny how you keep excluding important context and flat out ignoring the header of the very chart you're citing.

No, you're not even close to keeping up.