Scientists discover that climate-change skeptics are bozos

[trysail]

Patrick-

See what happens? Ya get people making up their minds based on newspaper articles written by dopes paid to fill empty space between advertisements. Not a goddamn one of 'em has a clue what the fuck they're talking about. They apparently like to sit around the campfire and tell each other scary stories.


Here's the deal folks: a computer model of the future is nothing more than "a glorified opinion."



This is how you get real estate bubbles. This is how you get Y2K panic. This is how you get people refusing to vaccinate their children. This is how you get people to buy shitty securities somehow transformed into gold by alchemy, bundling and the imprimatur of Moody's. This is how you get "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness of Crowds."

 

[Karen Kraft]

Patrick-

See what happens? Ya get people making up their minds based on newspaper articles written by dopes paid to fill empty space between advertisements. Not a goddamn one of 'em has a clue what the fuck they're talking about. They apparently like to sit around the campfire and tell each other scary stories.


Here's the deal folks: a computer model of the future is nothing more than "a glorified opinion."



This is how you get real estate bubbles. This is how you get Y2K panic. This is how you get people refusing to vaccinate their children. This is how you get people to buy shitty securities somehow transformed into gold by alchemy, bundling and the imprimatur of Moody's. This is how you get "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness of Crowds."

I forgot all about the Y2K panic (I was but a teen at the time and didn't much care what happened anyway).

But it is amusing to watch the discredited and the disgraced flop about, searching for that magic bit of bullshit that will make them appear a bit less comical to the rest of us... to themselves.

 

[stephen55]

There is reality and then there is the public perception of reality.

Reality is what's happening. The earth is either getting warmer or it isn't.

What we have in this thread is a good example of the public (mis)perception of reality.

The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, "glaciergate" and Trysail's endless cut and paste all have no effect on what is really happening.

Period.

Paragraph.

 

[thør]

Well, I knew that much. I just wasn't sure what you were getting at.

The carbon is virtually all organic carbon that's been sequestered since the Pleistocene. And it's been slowly melting for a long time. The current research is still in the guesstimate phase of how much carbon is really there and what the timing and mechanisms are for carbon release.

When most folks say Yedoma, they are generally talking about a large mass in Siberia, but there's plenty of the same type of material here in Alaska. And I wouldn't doubt that historically, there was similar material as far south as New Jersey and Iowa.

There's still a lot to know.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

c' mon trysail- Why don't you nail down your statement, where you really meant it to land?

From our dear enthusiastic trysail-
"....people making up their minds based on newspaper articles written by dopes paid to fill empty space between advertisements."

trysail, are you trying to tell the good people of the GB, that you have the ability to read my mind,
and know what exactly what motivated me to post the article from the Boston Globe?

Another trysail opinion-
Here's the deal folks: a computer model of the future is nothing more than "a glorified opinion."

{gsgs comment- If anything was learned from Richard Muller- that even people with dishonest motives can contribute,
if only to provide something that can be disproved with facts.}

The Boston Globe does not automatically regurgitate what ever is floating around.
It's a college and university town and there are respected and highly valued scientists
looking over whatever is printed in our "home town" rag.
The Boston Globe lags behind everyone else, because they bother to double check the facts.

 

[thør]

Dear General Board:

I am sorry.

Love,
Sonny L.

Sincerely?

 

[KRCummings]

I totally believe in climate change. Last night it was about 40 degrees and right now it's around 60. Not to mention yesterday it rained and today is has not.
Yeah.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

I sincerely hope you've learned your lesson.

I'm a chastened man. It's all blowjob and baseball threads from here out.

 

[JohnnySavage]

I'm a chastened man. It's all blowjob and baseball threads from here out.

If I end up putting your on ignore for your never ending cut and paste thread, just tweet me any amusing observations you have.

 

[Karen Kraft]

The carbon is virtually all organic carbon that's been sequestered since the Pleistocene. And it's been slowly melting for a long time. The current research is still in the guesstimate phase of how much carbon is really there and what the timing and mechanisms are for carbon release.

When most folks say Yedoma, they are generally talking about a large mass in Siberia, but there's plenty of the same type of material here in Alaska. And I wouldn't doubt that historically, there was similar material as far south as New Jersey and Iowa.

There's still a lot to know.

Why confuse people with facts, when all they want is to force everyone to buy carbon units from ClimaSwindlers?

 

[trysail]

the article from the Boston Globe?

That ain't the Globe; that's an AP article by Seth Borenstein.


There's not much agreement between the headline and the body.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

AP's headine for the article-

Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real

Boston Globe's headline for the article-

Skeptic finds global warming is indeed real

I have no idea why the Boston Globe editor chose to change the wording
of the headline. I'm not a mind reader.

It's not difficult to look up the original article at AP.

Yes, trysail, it is fairly obvious that the article published in the Boston Globe
did not originate from any writer on the Boston Globe staff. AP is clearly seen.
No Boston Globe writer is credited.

 

[cjh]

10,002

 

[Sonny Limatina]

My son sometimes counts with the same letter at the beginning of each word, just to be a dork: Done, Doo, Dree, Dour, Dive, etc. The "thirties" are especially entertaining this way, but we can't let on that we think so.

Dirty.

Dirty doo

Dirty door
Dirty dive
Dirty dicks
Dirty Devon
Dirty date
Dirty dine.

 

[phrodeau]

My son sometimes counts with the same letter at the beginning of each word, just to be a dork: Done, Doo, Dree, Dour, Dive, etc. The "thirties" are especially entertaining this way, but we can't let on that we think so.

Dirty.

Dirty doo

Dirty door
Dirty dive
Dirty dicks
Dirty Devon
Dirty date
Dirty dine.

Sounds like he learned something from a nasty uncle.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

Sounds like he learned something from a nasty uncle.

I had a step-something or other who swore that she taught her friend's kids the colors all wrong as a joke, over and over again, and that it took her friend years to sort it out.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

My son sometimes counts with the same letter at the beginning of each word, just to be a dork: Done, Doo, Dree, Dour, Dive, etc. The "thirties" are especially entertaining this way, but we can't let on that we think so.

Dirty.

Dirty doo

Dirty door
Dirty dive
Dirty dicks
Dirty Devon
Dirty date
Dirty dine.

Devon Daniels.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lif6thWn2q1qdcrbdo1_500.jpg

*ghasp*

 

[Peregrinator]

The carbon is virtually all organic carbon that's been sequestered since the Pleistocene. And it's been slowly melting for a long time. The current research is still in the guesstimate phase of how much carbon is really there and what the timing and mechanisms are for carbon release.

When most folks say Yedoma, they are generally talking about a large mass in Siberia, but there's plenty of the same type of material here in Alaska. And I wouldn't doubt that historically, there was similar material as far south as New Jersey and Iowa.

There's still a lot to know.

You hear about it from time to time in the literature. I agree; of course we don't know it all yet.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

When you post an article from Michelle Malkin's Hotair (Perfect name for her blog site by the way, since she's full of it) laced throughout with excerpts from the "Daily Mail", you should expect pointing and laughing and apparently you do. It didn't stop you from posting that tripe though did it Cap'n GluttonForPunishment?

Funny that you show disdain for links to primary research while posting links and C&P jobs from blog sites attempting to interpret the data. One might think you have an agenda of your own rather than an interest in the facts.

What she also seems furious about is the way that Prof Muller went about publishing BEST’s results without consulting her and before a proper peer review could be carried out. “It is not how I would have played it,” she has said. “I was informed only when I got a group email. I think they have made errors and I distance myself from what they did. It would have been smart to consult me.”

http://www.express.co.uk/features/view/280948/Is-global-warming-over-

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Typical.

Attack the source, not the "pop" science...



What the hell is so bad about peer review or dissent among your group?

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Typical.

Attack the source, not the "pop" science...



What the hell is so bad about peer review or dissent among your group?

Get your shit straight Cap'n.

You can't badmouth consensus among scientists as a "bad thing™" then shout from the rooftops about something not being peer reviewed.

What was I thinking? Of course you can, it's par for the course for you to contradict yourself. Normally it takes at least a day or so, although you have managed it within the same post a few times.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

So, that's all you got...



Weak. More ad hominem. Just so very typical. Even Lovelynice avoids that.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I guess that about says everything...



We don't need no stinkin' peer review, and if a peer is not on board, we just put them on ignore and go behind their backs...

There is, after all, a certain honor in Science.

It's infallible...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Get your shit straight Cap'n.

You can't badmouth consensus among scientists as a "bad thing™" then shout from the rooftops about something not being peer reviewed.

What was I thinking? Of course you can, it's par for the course for you to contradict yourself. Normally it takes at least a day or so, although you have managed it within the same post a few times.

There is no "consensus."

That's the point.

Moron.

They just act as if they have a consensus and discredit and dismiss anyone who would dissent to the point that the only "accredited" peers left to review anything are the True Believers...

They knew Curry did not agree with their "finding" so they fucking ignored her and said the hell with the review, we have a headline that will, again, make it look like the argument is over and further enable the Holy Crusade. First word out wins the day in the world of Political Science.

So therefore, you have no contradiction, just your burning hate and poor education.

You are engaging in the ad hominem of the fallacy of ascription.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I guess the problem you have is that you can't see that this is an

ETHICS

problem in the Scientific community.



That might be because Socialism and its religion of Gaia cannot afford ethics since it is a plunder-based system...