The horror of global warming!

ginjawarrior said:
Oh nice a blog piece about an article from populartechnology how cute...
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/606773-anti-cannabis-site-populartechnology-aka.html

Could you not find a worse site?
Click to expand...

Forbes not good enough? How many other news sites, blogs, politicians etc are anti-cannabis... It's still doesn't change the fact that buck is wrong in repeating claims of a consensus, let alone a 97% consensus... Didn't want to post to anything other than a half reputable news site, as I know your vagina gets sore when anyone links to a blog...
 
echelon1k1 said:
Forbes not good enough? How many other news sites, blogs, politicians etc are anti-cannabis... It's still doesn't change the fact that buck is wrong in repeating claims of a consensus, let alone a 97% consensus... Didn't want to post to anything other than a half reputable news site, as I know your vagina gets sore when anyone links to a blog...
Click to expand...
Forbes is commenting on poptech piece they bring nothing themselves

Poptech is the bottom of the barrel and your a joke for thinking anything he says is proof of anything
 
UncleBuck said:
there are many aussies on this board, not a single one of them comes anywhere close to the angry bitterness of echelon. aussies usually seem to be quite the opposite from what i've seen and read here.
Click to expand...

I love how you imply anger and bitterness when I point out what a hypocritical douchebag you are... When you start on the Australian shit, I know your jimmies are a rustlin'...
 
ginjawarrior said:
Forbes is commenting on poptech piece they bring nothing themselves

Poptech is the bottom of the barrel and your a joke for thinking anything he says is proof of anything
Click to expand...

ginjawarrior said:
You should read the cites you bring here here sometimes sometimes you might understand what they're saying that way
Click to expand...

So are you claiming there's a 97% consensus too? Because you don't need forbes or poptech to tell you you're full of shit...
 
UncleBuck said:
there are many aussies on this board, not a single one of them comes anywhere close to the angry bitterness of echelon. aussies usually seem to be quite the opposite from what i've seen and read here.
Click to expand...

But you at least implied that you think aussies are stupid. I was just curious why you think that. Because of the aussies on this forum? Or was it just to wind echelon up?
 
Buck continually projects attributes according to geographical region and color. But he's totally not a bigot or racist.
 
Doran_Anderegg_Cook.jpg
 
ginjawarrior said:
Basic processes?

I jumped in to laugh at your idiotic use of poptech
Click to expand...

Like I said you cockney bastard, wasn't from forbes, poptech or sense about science. Just had to find something palatable to present it with, enter forbes. My claim stands and judging by your understanding of weight and mass, you're in no position to render an opinion.
 
kelly4 said:
Have you listened to yourself lately? You're breaking up...hello?...come in stupid!...Ahhh, they're you are. What words of wisdom? I'm just trying to talk about walleyes!
Click to expand...

So, what extra ice depth did you see, this winter, talking about walleyes?
 
echelon1k1 said:
Like I said you cockney bastard, wasn't from forbes, poptech or sense about science. Just had to find something palatable to present it with, enter forbes. My claim stands and judging by your understanding of weight and mass, you're in no position to render an opinion.
Click to expand...
You haven't backed up your claim that 3 seperate papers are wrong as such it's not got leg to stand on.

quote]
 
ginjawarrior said:
Doran_Anderegg_Cook.jpg
Click to expand...
Scientists who responded to the doran/zimmerman survey had this to say;

“..I did complete your survey. However, no matter how important, no matter how apparently obvious the combination of facts and theory, scientific issues cannot be decided by a vote of scientists. A consensus is not, at any given time, a good predictor of where the truth actually resides..” (Zimmerman feedback)

“..Science is not based on votes or consensus. Irrelevant question. Besides, which scientists do you regard as relevant?..” (Zimmerman feedback)

“..Science is based on scepticism and experimental proof. Whereas human GHG emissions certainly have a warming effect, the breakdown between natural and anthropogenic contributions to warming is poorly constrained..” (Zimmerman feedback)

Consensus is not science, you should know this.
 
echelon1k1 said:
Scientists who responded to the doran/zimmerman survey had this to say;

“..I did complete your survey. However, no matter how important, no matter how apparently obvious the combination of facts and theory, scientific issues cannot be decided by a vote of scientists. A consensus is not, at any given time, a good predictor of where the truth actually resides..” (Zimmerman feedback)

“..Science is not based on votes or consensus. Irrelevant question. Besides, which scientists do you regard as relevant?..” (Zimmerman feedback)

“..Science is based on scepticism and experimental proof. Whereas human GHG emissions certainly have a warming effect, the breakdown between natural and anthropogenic contributions to warming is poorly constrained..” (Zimmerman feedback)

Consensus is not science, you should know this.
Click to expand...
What no cite to say where you got this from?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top