[quote]Aragorn wrote:
I’m also still waiting for the Anchor to link his 97% claim. Or at least to defend, coherently, his 97% claim. I don’t think that’s going to happen.[/quote]
no i don’t think it will happen either. he must be sending out “private messaging” and believing he has won the debate because no one has responded in kind.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
…All planets have cycles of some kind…
[/quote]
Maybe that’s the take home point.
[/quote]
That’s fine. Then he should have said that. Because the way he typed it up, he is implicitly linking other planets warming with “liberal media”. That’s fucking ridiculous.
[/quote]
no here’s what’s ridiculous. people that can’t get over themselves because of past interactions with me in other threads. and usually in threads i start, like this one.
to ignore rising temperatures on planets in our own solar system should lead an intelligent connection to the idea that man is not responsible for “global warming, polar votex, climate change” or whatever the flavor of the month is, here on our home planet.
all planets have cycles and my link which you probably didn’t read stated such.
i am sick of the liberal manure which states the earth is more important than people. the idea that fossil fuels will cause the earth’s destruction… so the entire planet should be powered by solar panels and windmills.
…and that if you don’t believe in global warming, climate change or now polar vortex you are a racist, a homophobe and denialist - with it’s own global warming denial definition page on liberal wikipedia. lol.
there are experts in cardiology, pulmonology, neurophysiology, mathematics and even cooking. but there is no expert that can tell you what will happen in forty years with the earth’s climate cycle.
[/quote]
You’re not worth the time to get preoccupied with. I have rarely interacted with you across this PWI forum, and rarely replied to you directly. I even defended you a couple times in different threads, including one of your first race-baiting threads which I now thoroughly regret doing… In fact I have agreed with your position a number of times, though certainly never on race. Naturally of course, you neither care nor remember and are only preoccupied with anybody who disagrees with you, spouting immediate ad hominems or snide remarks. Truly the hallmark of a great mind trapped in diminutive form. I will call bullshit bullshit when I see it, and sensationalist garbage just that. You posted a poorly worded, sensationalist claim that regardless of its core truth (which, by the way, I noted and AGREED with your buried point–but of course you wouldnt pay attention to that because I had the gall to say something in a blunt way to you) was stated in such way as to be at best meaningless and at worst absolute horseshit.
What’s even more amusing is that you have called me a liberal in the past based on the fact that I called you on a comment. You clearly have no grasp of my politics because if anybody did they would know that I am most certainly not a “liberal”. And for the final bit of inanity from you you posted that I must not have read your link because it says “all planets have cycles”. Certainly you did not fully read my earlier post where I stated that same thing in almost exactly those same words. [/quote]
if i am not worth the time to be preoccupied with why make a personal attack on my understanding of science and in a thread i started. must be worth some time. touche.
you are a liberal as compared to ultra conservative teachers, colleagues and business owners i know and have grown up with and have great respect for. they are the ones the country is built upon because of their financial success and discipline.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
I have agreed with your position a number of times, though certainly never on race. [/quote]
i thank you for the time you defended me.
you are mistaken and have no clue as to what my thoughts on race are or you have been mislead by the two LSD boobs that ride my coat tails in many threads and are liars.
anyone that believes i am a racist or a race-baiter are totally ignorant of it’s real definition. the words are tossed around too easily.
it is a divisive weapon wielded usually by shit4brains and eventually backfires on them. in the mean time passerby forum members catch the phrase and allows it to taint their opinion of my opinions. that of course is the endgame of these two LSD addict shit4brains.
there are many sides to conservatism but none behold to changing a debate in the arena of ideas by referring to one as a racist, homophobe or global warming denier. liberals expose themselves with that exact predictable behavior from the start. it shows their lack of patience in gathering real facts and it shows their lack of confidence for their side of the debate.
think for yourself. use your god given wisdom and don’t parrot easy to checkmate strategies. like personal attacks when no one did the same to you.
i didn’t consider what i replied with personal slander, i simply mentioned past post interactions and get over yourself in regard to them. i never used the f word or personally called you a name or inferred stupidity on your part.
any sensationalist garbage that i post i do so because i have experienced it personally. except for shooting a man as a neighborhood watch member.
i have read data from nasa reports that other planets were experiencing a rise in temperature and it has been mentioned in news stories on fox. no humans creating green house gases on other planets so it would make sense to parallel their warming to ours.
i notice the liberal pro global warming crowd defends it as they do abortion, akin to one’s religious beliefs. to ignore this is to ignore that we will never embrace each others beliefs. there is no middle ground.
like gravity, climate change is part of the earth experience.
greenland was once green and will be again one day. man’s driving habits had nothing to do with it changing and has nothing to do with hot or freezing temperatures. my .02
I am going to regret this, but I am going to reply here. First, it’s not a personal attack. A personal attack would be on you. A statement of fact about your science understanding is a statement of fact, however badly it may make one feel reading it because of the blunt way it was put.
Secondly if that statement was directed at me particularly instead of generally, I AM thinking for myself. Simply because you don’t agree with me doesn’t mean I’m parroting anything, least of all “liberal media bias”. I’ll also point out that I am active in research and infinitely more well-educated on science in general than you, so it will never hold water to accuse me of “parroting” scientific concepts instead of thinking for myself when my job description entails as a fundamental prerequisite critical thinking and analysis rather than blind acceptance. I may be and have been wrong in the past, but I am always thinking for myself. You just might happen not to agree with what I think.
Thirdly this statement [quote] no humans creating green house gases on other planets so it would make sense to parallel their warming to ours. [/quote] is precisely why I said what I did. It may make sense to you, but it is not scientifically valid. I said it before and I’ll say it again: all planets have cycles. It does make sense to measure the solar effect on warming of our own planet and a number of people have done this. However, only one planet has humans contributing to said cycle, and only one planet has the atmosphere and water content to support the amount of life it does, and only one planet has the soil make-up that it does, and only one planet sits at this orbit distance. The question is not “is global warming occurring”. All planets have cycles, but only one has humans.
The question is “what percentage of this is human contributed, AND is there a significant effect from human activity on the global climate due to this percentage, AND how sensitive is the climate to perturbation leading to feed-forward away from equilibrium”. The first two parts are not questions you need to be a “liberal global warming alarmist” to ask or research–or even accept as truly happening.
It is a FACT that many “global warming skeptics/deniers” who do research for a living and publish in peer reviewed journals accept as accurate that humans are in fact contributing to the warming process on top of natural processes. That is not the question. That has never been the question, even before the “wackos” got their claws into the research.
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
greenland was once green and will be again one day. man’s driving habits had nothing to do with it changing and has nothing to do with hot or freezing temperatures. my .02[/quote]
You mean there might be forces outside of mankind, much more powerful than egocentric self loathing, like gravity or heat energy that might affect our lives on this planet? Forces of such magnitude that even slight variation could wipe us clean off the face of this planet in the blink of an eye?
That is the most racist, homophobic, anti-everything pc but still somehow sacred thing I’ve ever heard.
For realz though- I’ve always found it funny that people who hate god and defer to the power of the universe have a hard time believing that the same neutral but extremely powerful combination of forces won’t or can’t turn them back into the star stuff from whence they came. It’s like there is a disconnect between what they believe and what is happening.
It’s all our fault. These infinitesimally small periods of time which we as humans have inhabited the planet have culminated in disaster because boobs racist privileged big pharma darfur human rights violation industrialists(trails off on a disconnected rant about all that is wrong in the world)…
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
greenland was once green and will be again one day. man’s driving habits had nothing to do with it changing and has nothing to do with hot or freezing temperatures. my .02[/quote]
You mean there might be forces outside of mankind, much more powerful than egocentric self loathing, like gravity or heat energy that might affect our lives on this planet? Forces of such magnitude that even slight variation could wipe us clean off the face of this planet in the blink of an eye?
That is the most racist, homophobic, anti-everything pc but still somehow sacred thing I’ve ever heard.
For realz though- I’ve always found it funny that people who hate god and defer to the power of the universe have a hard time believing that the same neutral but extremely powerful combination of forces won’t or can’t turn them back into the star stuff from whence they came. It’s like there is a disconnect between what they believe and what is happening.
It’s all our fault. These infinitesimally small periods of time which we as humans have inhabited the planet have culminated in disaster because boobs racist privileged big pharma darfur human rights violation industrialists(trails off on a disconnected rant about all that is wrong in the world)…
[/quote]
Agree, its funky
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
greenland was once green and will be again one day. man’s driving habits had nothing to do with it changing and has nothing to do with hot or freezing temperatures. my .02[/quote]
You mean there might be forces outside of mankind, much more powerful than egocentric self loathing, like gravity or heat energy that might affect our lives on this planet? Forces of such magnitude that even slight variation could wipe us clean off the face of this planet in the blink of an eye?
That is the most racist, homophobic, anti-everything pc but still somehow sacred thing I’ve ever heard.
For realz though- I’ve always found it funny that people who hate god and defer to the power of the universe have a hard time believing that the same neutral but extremely powerful combination of forces won’t or can’t turn them back into the star stuff from whence they came. It’s like there is a disconnect between what they believe and what is happening.
It’s all our fault. These infinitesimally small periods of time which we as humans have inhabited the planet have culminated in disaster because boobs racist privileged big pharma darfur human rights violation industrialists(trails off on a disconnected rant about all that is wrong in the world)…
[/quote]
Agree, its funky[/quote]
Finally! Someone who understands! You must be my long lost brother from different parents.
edited for afterthought: Some people need a boogey man. They usually find one in things that they just don’t understand or hadn’t considered. A guy I worked with for a while last year was under the very strong belief that people in black helicopters had him under surveillance, and for good reason. There were helicopters flying around, sometimes very low, right over his house.
Turns out that companies are doing tons of surveillance for the shale drilling projects in this area, and his house sits smack dab in the middle of a big claim.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
greenland was once green and will be again one day. man’s driving habits had nothing to do with it changing and has nothing to do with hot or freezing temperatures. my .02[/quote]
You mean there might be forces outside of mankind, much more powerful than egocentric self loathing, like gravity or heat energy that might affect our lives on this planet? Forces of such magnitude that even slight variation could wipe us clean off the face of this planet in the blink of an eye?
That is the most racist, homophobic, anti-everything pc but still somehow sacred thing I’ve ever heard.
For realz though- I’ve always found it funny that people who hate god and defer to the power of the universe have a hard time believing that the same neutral but extremely powerful combination of forces won’t or can’t turn them back into the star stuff from whence they came. It’s like there is a disconnect between what they believe and what is happening.
It’s all our fault. These infinitesimally small periods of time which we as humans have inhabited the planet have culminated in disaster because boobs racist privileged big pharma darfur human rights violation industrialists(trails off on a disconnected rant about all that is wrong in the world)…
[/quote]
you are pretty funny.
i’m thinking we can all get along. how bout i take you guys out to denny’s one night.
i know which one beth works.
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
you are pretty funny.
i’m thinking we can all get along. how bout i take all you guys out to denny’s one night.
i know which one beth works. [/quote]
If anyone takes him up don’t bring your kids.
[quote]conservativedog wrote:
you are pretty funny.
i’m thinking we can all get along. how bout i take all you guys out to denny’s one night.
i know which one beth works. [/quote]
That would probably be a lot of fun. I don’t know if I could have her as a waitress though. She’d have to sit down with us too.
Push what is priceless is that not one Hollywood celebrity seems to read anything outside their world of liberal talking points. They still mention climate change at every awards party and Dave Letterman interview.
the article you linked starts…
"It’s snowy here today in Washington, D.C., so it’s a great day to list the reasons why climate scientists think the global warming - which Al Gore said would melt the polar ice caps by now - has been on hiatus for the past 17 years.
Climate scientists have been stumped by the “pause” in global warming, which virtually none of the climate models predicted."
I read the scrolling tweets at the bottom of a CNN segment which featured a meteorologist who defined the drought in California, the freeze along eastern U.S. and weird weather in Europe all in the same week as simply a ROLL of the DICE that happens from time to time for NO REASON.
The scrolling tweets from CLUELESS global warming nut-jobs kept along the lines of …“and people say there is nothing fishy going on with climate change” or “how can anyone deny this week that we have to have global legislation to stop these strange weather patterns before it’s too late!”
---- All tweeting at the very moment this meteorologist stated “this has happened throughout history and will continue to happen”
Those images of polar bears stranded atop tiny glaciers, looking very sad about their melting home in the North Pole, are phony, says radio host Rush Limbaugh. The lefty media created them to drive the discussion on global warming, which is also phony, he says.
You know what else is phony, says Limbaugh? The “polar vortex” chilling much of the country with record low temperatures (though not really colder ones than on Mars).
The media is playing it up as an extreme, counterintuitive consequence of a warming planet as part of its global warming “hoax” Limbaugh said, when the polar blast really proves just the opposite.
“We are having a record-breaking cold snap in many parts of the country,” he said during his show.
“And right on schedule the media have to come up with a way to make it sound like it’s completely unprecedented. Because they’ve got to find a way to attach this to the global warming agenda, and they have. It’s called the “polar vortex.” The dreaded polar vortex.”
In his speech, dubbed, “Earth Has A Fever,” Gore referred to a prediction by U.S. climate scientist Wieslaw Maslowski that the Arctic’s summer ice could “completely disappear” by 2013 due to global warming caused by carbon emissions.
… Another new study to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week warns that it could happen in as little as seven years, seven years from now.
It’s like a shotgun approach. If you cover enough area with a blast you will at least graze the mark. Something WILL happen. The climate WILL change to some degree and if a mouthpiece speculates often and broadly enough they will be at least “close enough”.
Like predicting a traffic accident on a highly traveled roadway. There is going to be an accident on I-376 on Monday morning between 7:30and 8:00.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
“There’s a sucker born every minute” and anyone, and I mean anyone who at this juncture buys into the idea that man-made activities are leading to meteorological cataclysm is the very definition of sucker.[/quote]
Our leading authority on almost everything here PWI .
It amazes me how all the people can disagree with the majority of scientist , why?
IMO Oil Gas and Coal have more money to infuse their campaign than do the Scientist
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
I personally feel the first big thing we humans will have to deal with is overpopulation. I may not see it in my lifetime, but it won’t be to long after that.
I won’t pretend we can’t find a solution, but it is inevitable.[/quote]
This has been said, over and over, by many people for (at the very least) 250 years or so now…
We can still feed everyone.
Pretty sure you’re wasting your time worrying about it at this point. [/quote]
I agree he is wasting his time but the likes of the California drought could change our ability to feed our selves or at least as we have became accustomed to
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
“There’s a sucker born every minute” and anyone, and I mean anyone who at this juncture buys into the idea that man-made activities are leading to meteorological cataclysm is the very definition of sucker.[/quote]
Our leading authority on almost everything here PWI .
It amazes me how all the people can disagree with the majority of scientist , why?
IMO Oil Gas and Coal have more money to infuse their campaign than do the Scientist
[/quote]
What is the percentage?
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
“There’s a sucker born every minute” and anyone, and I mean anyone who at this juncture buys into the idea that man-made activities are leading to meteorological cataclysm is the very definition of sucker.[/quote]
Our leading authority on almost everything here PWI .
It amazes me how all the people can disagree with the majority of scientist , why?
IMO Oil Gas and Coal have more money to infuse their campaign than do the Scientist
[/quote]
What is the percentage?
[/quote]
I really do not know how you could calculate the ALL KNOWING FAUX NEWS (absolute denial) of climate change to it’s adversary of the other media outlets of reasonable and trying to see if there is any truth.
Why is there a “pause” in Global Varming ? When is a “pause” not longer a “pause” and becomes a halt or a reversal ?
We have had the fewest number of major hurricanes since Katrina, there have been no category 3 storms or higher since 2005, that is the longest drought of hurricanes since the 1800’s. We also saw a very low number of tornadoes this year.
We have had the fewest numbers of wild fires here in California.
Not long ago, climate change enthusiasts claimed children would never see snow again, not the way we have. There is snow on the ground in 49 states right now, Hawaii being the only one without.
As far as the severe drought we keep hearing about in California, it hasn’t been this dry here since the year 1580, which lasted 100 years. So explain the carbon emission correlation on that one, because I doubt there were many 18-wheelers clogging up the highways back then.
The planet has not warmed for the last 17 years, for whatever reason or another.
The numbers do not favor the Climate Change religion. If you want to study the climate, don’t make policy based on bullshit no one understands. This whole bullshit is nothing more government agencies feeding off of this frenzy.