Global Warming?

Status
Not open for further replies.
   / Global Warming? #1,741  

Lets see how many Tree huggers have the stones to read this.


Eye's work well for reading! :thumbsup:
Stones, they be something else and can really vary in composition and formation. They don't read well.:rolleyes:

Google says this guy was a journalist. Couldn't find any papers of a scientific bent that were published in Journals.:thumbsup:
 
   / Global Warming? #1,742  
No, they prefer spoon fed facts.

Most (but not all) of the man made side of the dilemma only want facts that support their side...

Many just want to huff and puff (citing only what supports their beliefs) and try to make you think that their opinion is right and anyone with opposing views is wrong...

IMO, if the evidence was (omni) conclusive...there would much fewer skeptics...but is does not even come close to being conclusive and it won't ever be in most if not all of our lifetimes...
 
   / Global Warming? #1,745  
Boy's oh Boy's, did you say you are one of the ingullibale?:thumbsup:

I suppose those of a certain mindset and reading level could construe it that way, so sure, why not? I mean why should I agitate the inmates before their morning meds?
By the way, I have a really good friend who is a Newfi and he almost seems normal, must be something in the water around The Scosh that makes you guys strange!:D
 
   / Global Warming? #1,746  
I suppose those of a certain mindset and reading level could construe it that way, so sure, why not? I mean why should I agitate the inmates before their morning meds?

You sure you up on your Reading?;)

The Rock, nope, I'm not from there.:thumbsup:
 
   / Global Warming? #1,747  
Surely you cannot be so ignorant that you didn't recognize that as a poke at you for repeatedly using the phrase to cover up your inability to answer the simple questions I've asked of all you AGW proponents. Or, perhaps you are, I wouldn't know.
Isn't it hard to maintain your veil of narcissism when you can't answer such simple questions? I mean really, how can you continue to believe yourself so intelligent when you can't even find a cut and paste to accurately rebut those simple facts that you have been quizzed on repeatedly? In the past 10,000 years there have been much warmer events that actually warmed much faster and they could not possible have been related to fossil fuel use, why is this time absolutely in total opposition to the previous events? Just accurately and with proof answer how those other events happened and why this time has nothing to do with those reasons and you win! Of course you can't so you "Deny, deny, deny re-accuse!":laughing:

Your back tracking is amazing. You made a claim that was ficticious and false and then come back with dribble. Amazing!

Your "gotcha" questions are indeed simple and its likely that with some research you could find the scientists explanation. (If you were interested in the science)

In case you didn't read the article I referenced a few times now.

Distinguishing Climate "Deniers" From "Skeptics"
A LITTLE HUMILITY

Skeptics go on to admit that it is both rare and significant when nearly 100% of the scientists in any field share a consensus-model, before splitting up to fight over sub-models. Hence, if an outsider perceives "something wrong" with a core scientific model, the humble and justified response of that curious outsider is to ask "what mistake am I making?" before assuming 100% of the experts are wrong.

In contrast, Deniers glom onto an anecdotal "gotcha!" from a dogma-driven radio show or politically biased blog site. Whereupon they conclude that ALL of the atmospheric scientists must be in on some wretched conspiracy. Uniformly. At the same time.
-----
You are quite predictable.

Loren
 
   / Global Warming? #1,748  
In contrast, Deniers glom onto an anecdotal "gotcha!" from a dogma-driven radio show or politically biased blog site. Whereupon they conclude that ALL of the atmospheric scientists must be in on some wretched conspiracy. Uniformly. At the same time.
-----
You are quite predictable.

Loren[/QUOTE]

Someone knows the pink book very well.
Accuse the other side of exactly what you are doing. Therefore any counter appears as sour grapes.
Because in the end, you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
 
   / Global Warming? #1,749  
Because in the end, you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

Whatever one is when the call comes wind direction and velocity awareness might keep things presentable!:thumbsup:
 
   / Global Warming? #1,750  
Updated: Mar 12, 2012 8:07 PM EDT

KUSI.com - KUSI News - San Diego CA - News, Weather, PPR - The Amazing Story Behind the Global Warming Scam
By John Coleman
January 28, 2009 (Revised and edited February 11, 2009)

The key players are now all in place in Washington and in state governments across America to officially label carbon dioxide as a pollutant and enact laws that tax us citizens for our carbon footprints. Only two details stand in the way: the faltering economic times and a dramatic turn toward a colder climate. The last two bitter winters have led to a rise in public awareness that there is no runaway global warming.

I started reading- took the challenge!- and stopped after reading the underlined. I realize he is referring to a few years ago- but in Maine- every winter is the same or warmer than the previous one. No global cooling there. This is just more wishful foolishness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
 
Top