new data/theory on Antarctic ice shelf melting
Return to Board  •  Menu  •  Bottom  Page 3 of 3
Message
re: new data/theory on Antarctic ice shelf melting
Posted by CptBengal on 4/26 at 2:36 pm to ottothewise
quote:

I didnt flunk out.


out of law school. because you were at the track. But you were in law school before you completed your undergrad...thats why you then went back to finish your undergrad.

I have the thread bookmarked for you if you need a refresh on your lies.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by ottothewise on 4/26 at 3:10 pm to CptBengal
changing majors six times is not flunking out.

grow a pair. find something substantive to whine about.




Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by CptBengal on 4/26 at 3:26 pm to ottothewise
quote:

changing majors six times is not flunking out.


law school isn't a major otto.

a 188 iq must surely know such details.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by ljhog on 4/26 at 4:33 pm to ottothewise
quote:

the story is about water temp.

No the real story is that the story is constantly changing. First it was gonna be an ice age. Then it was Global Warming. Now it's "Climate Change". And now since surface and air temperature trends are not suppportive of the narrative it's "water temperature". No what it is, is BS the man's activity is causing it!


This post was edited on 4/26 at 4:34 pm

Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by wareagle79 on 4/26 at 7:59 pm to TROLA
quote:

More like... They have been wrong so many fricking times and continue to perpetuate this idea that doom is imminent...warming this cooling that... Guess what, we are living on a rock with a molten core that has a big arse rock 240,000 miles away that revolves around us, all the while, we reside 90 million miles away from a living nucleur bomb that spits at us while we spin.... Now explain to me how the frick you can not see how insignificate we are in relation to our surrounding.. Can we frick up our planet, of course but think real hard about the article you linked. Do you believe every new theory that comes out? Is that really the model of someone THINKING ?



^^^^^ Amen

Dont forget that 30 years ago we were scared of Global COOLING. They are all theories and not facts as we cannot measure or substantiate the data either way.

Global Cooling



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by foshizzle on 4/27 at 12:47 am to CptBengal
quote:

Weibull distribution


shite. I may have to relearn what I'd forgotten since grad school.

But cherry-picking data to fit the prior conclusion is still bad research.

IMO there is something interesting here worthy of investigation but claims of certainty are overdone. That is typical in the history of scientific research, actually.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by CptBengal on 4/27 at 8:50 am to foshizzle
quote:

IMO there is something interesting here worthy of investigation but claims of certainty are overdone. That is typical in the history of scientific research, actually.



agreed. My argument is when scientists forgo being researchers to become activists.

That is the problem with many of the "alarmists"



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by foshizzle on 4/27 at 10:07 am to CptBengal
quote:

My argument is when scientists forgo being researchers to become activists.


In order to be successful a researcher in any field simply must actively push the story his research has to tell. Nobody ever made a career out of disproving anything. It is not only possible but not uncommon to have a lifelong career built on work that is wrong or worthless provided nobody disproves it until your retirement.

So I don't blame global warming researchers for pushing an agenda. Ultimately their careers depend on doing that. But it doesn't mean they are right.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Taxing Authority on 4/27 at 10:13 am to foshizzle
quote:

But cherry-picking data to fit the prior conclusion is still bad research.
Google how Briffa used just a few ring data from just a few trees to come up with a time-temperature series. He simply tossed the ones that didn't agree with his conclusion. But kept the ones that did. Awesome.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by BugAC on 4/27 at 10:15 am to ottothewise
quote:

ottothewise


You do understand that the Antarctic ice shelf ALWAYS MELTS, every single year, during the warmer parts of the year. You must also understand, that every fricking year, around the colder times, the ice shelves expand.

Also, i'll pose the question that you can never answer, and that usually drives you liberals out of your own global warming thread.
Explain the shifting in climate from the little ice age to the medieval warming period, and how that is considered cyclical, yet today's current climate change is considered man made.
Explain the shift in climate in europe from mediterranean to a more sub-tropical climate in the 1700's, and how this is natural, yet today's climate is man-made.
Explain record highs and lows in the early 1900's, and how those are not man made, yet now any change in temperature is man-made CO2.
Explain how, CO2, which is .08% of our climate, is now the driving factor of ambient temperatures, when water vapor consists of more than 20% of our climate.

Also, what should the world's thermometer be?


This post was edited on 4/27 at 10:17 am

Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Taxing Authority on 4/27 at 10:16 am to CptBengal
quote:

My argument is when scientists forgo being researchers to become activists.
I agree. When you stop refering to your research as "research" and start referring to it as "the cause" you've jumped the shark and lost your objectivity as a scientist.

Yet this is exactly how the leaders in the "climate science" community refer to their "research" throughout the Climategate emails when they thought no one was listening. Is it "a cause" or research. Two very different things.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Taxing Authority on 4/27 at 10:17 am to foshizzle
quote:

So I don't blame global warming researchers for pushing an agenda.
Aye. But just listen to the warmists. They constantly talk about how non-biased science is. How it is agenda free, when funded by government. Yet if exxon pays for it...



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by BugAC on 4/27 at 12:22 pm to Taxing Authority
Paging Otto. Will you respond argument?

This post was edited on 4/27 at 12:23 pm

Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by CptBengal on 4/27 at 12:23 pm to BugAC
quote:

Paging Otto. Will you respond





Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by BugAC on 4/27 at 1:16 pm to CptBengal
and it appears otto was run out of his own thread.....again


Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by GoBigOrange86 on 4/27 at 1:40 pm to ottothewise
Whether the Earth is warming or not, it's clear that it has been used and exaggerated to advance a specific political agenda and that the science has become less important than the policy. I mean, my gosh, we all want a clean environment...but do we really need the government telling us we have to buy $20 light bulbs?

The arrogance of thinking that in about 100 years of automobiles and electricity we have done incomprehensible, irreparable damage to a planet that is four and a half billion years old is staggering.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Shananigans on 4/27 at 5:26 pm to BugAC
quote:

You do understand that the Antarctic ice shelf ALWAYS MELTS, every single year, during the warmer parts of the year. You must also understand, that every fricking year, around the colder times, the ice shelves expand. Also, i'll pose the question that you can never answer, and that usually drives you liberals out of your own global warming thread. Explain the shifting in climate from the little ice age to the medieval warming period, and how that is considered cyclical, yet today's current climate change is considered man made. Explain the shift in climate in europe from mediterranean to a more sub-tropical climate in the 1700's, and how this is natural, yet today's climate is man-made. Explain record highs and lows in the early 1900's, and how those are not man made, yet now any change in temperature is man-made CO2. Explain how, CO2, which is .08% of our climate, is now the driving factor of ambient temperatures, when water vapor consists of more than 20% of our climate. Also, what should the world's thermometer be?


The Earth naturally goes through warming and cooling phases. Anyone with a mediocre education knows this. Its all in the geological record that has been studied for quite some time now.

Also just to point out to all of the posters who base their argument on small increments of time i.e. 5 years, 10 years, 50 years, 100 years... you look like a ignorant frick. The earth is estimated to be 4.6 billion years old. You are essentially looking at a millisecond of a crime and claiming to know how it all played out.

Now, man causing global warming? I doubt it. However, we do have a impact on our environment to some extent.


This post was edited on 4/27 at 5:33 pm

Reply  •  Back to Top  •  Refresh
Return to Board
Jump to Page   

           Page 3 of 3           

 

 Message Boards
 Tiger Rant
 Score Board
 Recruiting Board
 SEC Rant
 Saints Talk
 Pelicans Talk
 More Sports Board
 Soccer Board
 O-T Lounge
 Tech Board
 Outdoor Board
 Movie/TV Board
 Music Board
 Political Talk
 Money Talk
 Fark Board
 Gaming Board
 Fantasy Sports
 Food and Drink Board
 Ticket Exchange
 Help Board
 

 News
 LSU
 More Sports
 Sports Lite
 

 Other Options
 >> Search
 

 SECRant.com Links
 SEC Rant
 SEC Recruiting
 SEC Tickets
 Off-Topic Board
 

 Geaux.com Dining Guide
 New Orleans
 Baton Rouge
 

 Site Features (Full Version)
 Home Page
 LSU Football Schedule
 Pick'em Home Page
 
Back to top
Sign In 
View in: Desktop
Copyright ©2014 TigerDroppings.com.