- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nice to see the NY Times doubling down on global warming
Posted on 2/9/14 at 7:53 am to Powerman
Posted on 2/9/14 at 7:53 am to Powerman
quote:No, no. We all take second fiddle to a truffle farming fictionist who is apparently a world authority on the subject.
A doctor a retired high school teacher and an accountant are all experts on climate science. How lucky of us to be graced with their presence here
0
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:01 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
its funding source is a well kept secret.
quote:Wait, you now admitting AGW science IS biased by funding?
We have NO IDEA who funds them
Wow!
In one thread you've admitted the sun does warm the Earth, AND AGW research will demonstrate whatever its funding sources expect it to demonstrate, scientific facts be damned.
Geaux Spidy!
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:08 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Wait, you now admitting AGW science IS biased by funding?
Wow!
Without knowing the source of the funding, I guess we'll never find out, will we?
quote:
In one thread you've admitted the sun does warm the Earth,
"Admitted" it?
You honestly think climate scientists aren't aware the sun warms the Earth? How the frick would the greenhouse effect work without it, Dr. Genius?
This post was edited on 2/9/14 at 8:09 am
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:10 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
You mean the sun contributes to warming?
No, of course not. We scientists believe the Earth is warmed by nuclear fuel deep within the Earth. The Sun's light simply bounces off the exosphere and goes into space, not warming the Earth at all.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:10 am to Powerman
quote:
I see all the usual charlatans on this topic are out in full force. A doctor a retired high school teacher and an accountant are all experts on climate science. How lucky of us to be graced with their presence here
The world's foremost experts on the topic all have phd's in economics.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:16 am to Cosmo
Even if the man made theory winds up being proven, it's a moot point because you are never going to get 7 or 8 billion people all acting in concert to correct it.
Some people need to stop worrying so much.
Some people need to stop worrying so much.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:18 am to Roger Klarvin
Still waiting for one of the AGW acolytes to tell us what the "global" temperature is supposed to be.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:18 am to Semaphore
quote:
Even if the man made theory winds up being proven, it's a moot point because you are never going to get 7 or 8 billion people all acting in concert to correct it.
Congratulations.
You're very close to the 3rd and final stage of global warming denial.
To re-cap, those stages are
1) The Earth is not warming
2) The Earth is warming but man didn't do it
3) The Earth is warming, man did it, but its too late to do anything.
quote:
Some people need to stop worrying so much.
I can tell you've thought very deeply on the issue.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:19 am to udtiger
quote:
Still waiting for one of the AGW acolytes to tell us what the "global" temperature is supposed to be.
I'm not really sure I understand the question. What is the scientific meaning of "supposed to be" ?
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:27 am to SpidermanTUba
So how much of the global warming is natural, how much is solar variation and how much is man made?
Nobody can answer this question. Also what about polar ice cap growth can this be seen as a positive sign or not?
Nobody can answer this question. Also what about polar ice cap growth can this be seen as a positive sign or not?
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:28 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
I'm not really sure I understand the question. What is the scientific meaning of "supposed to be" ?
let me translate for the stupid people:
If there was a global thermostat, at what temperature should it be set?
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:31 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
I'm not really sure I understand the question. What is the scientific meaning of "supposed to be" ?
I would say you are feigning ignorance, but your posting history indicates it's not an act. So, let me type this slowly so you will understand...
1) AGW/CC acolytes wail and gnash their teeth that the activities of man (CO2) are causing the "global" temperature to rise.
2) Inherent in the hysteria of the above are two assumptions:
A) that there is a normal "global" temperature for the Earth in its equillibrium state: "x"
B) because of man's activities, the "global" temperature is "y"
Neither you, nor any of the other acolytes, can tell us what "x" is.
Oh, and your priests haven't been able to get "y" right yet, despite constantly "revising" the data inputs for their models.
This post was edited on 2/9/14 at 8:39 am
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:32 am to ironsides
quote:
So how much of the global warming is natural, how much is solar variation and how much is man made?
Nobody can answer this question.
Nobody?
Really?
Have you heard of these guys:
LINK
I can tell you've done your homework.
quote:
Also what about polar ice cap growth can this be seen as a positive sign or not?
It happens every winter.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:33 am to Semaphore
quote:
let me translate for the stupid people:
Nice ad hominem.
quote:
If there was a global thermostat, at what temperature should it be set?
I guess that would depend on the personal preferences of the thermostat setter.
There isn't a "global thermostat"
I don't really see the relevance of your line of questioning.
This post was edited on 2/9/14 at 8:34 am
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:37 am to udtiger
quote:
I would say you are feigning ignorance, but your posting history indicates it's not an act. So, let me type this slowly so you will understand...
"Type slowly"?
You do realize, that on a message board like TD.com, the only intellectual deficiency slow typing can help with is that of the writer, right? quote:
1) AGW/CC acolytes wail and gnash their teeth that the activities of man (CO2) are cause the "global" temperature to rise.
2) Inherent in the hysteria of the above are two assumptions:
A) that there is a normal "global" temperature for the Earth in its equillibrium state: "x"
B) because of man's activities, the "global" temperature is "y"
Neither you, nor any of the other acolytes can tell us what "x" is.
I don't think that's true.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:41 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
There isn't a "global thermostat"
I am disappoint.
All this time you've been saying that people are causing the climate change and that changes must happen to reverse it. This implies that people can control the climate, like a global thermostat.
Now you you say, no way Jose to the global thermostat idea.
Which is it bub?
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:41 am to SpidermanTUba
So, what is "x"?
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:42 am to TrueTiger
quote:
All this time you've been saying that people are causing the climate change and that changes must happen to reverse it. This implies that people can control the climate, like a global thermostat.
No it doesn't.
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:42 am to udtiger
quote:
So, what is "x"?
Your assumptions are wrong.
This post was edited on 2/9/14 at 8:43 am
Posted on 2/9/14 at 8:46 am to SpidermanTUba
It's just interesting that you refuse to answer these questions with actual statistics. Yet you are so sure that change in weather is man made.
Your lack of facts is astounding.
Your lack of facts is astounding.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News