Scientists discover that climate-change skeptics are bozos

[Sonny Limatina]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ll58u4BbTX1qdfru5o1_500.jpg

Her tits are so nice that they've got tits of their own.

 

[thør]

Her tits are so nice that they've got tits of their own.

I dunno how she's affected the climate, but the whole freezer section at Safeways thawed out when she walked down the aisle.

 

[Ishmael]

Jesus fucking Christ.

1) No, you have not. I will, once again, direct readers to the thread I linked in which you said you'd post data from specific sources that refuted specific points I made. You did not do that, and still have not. You never will, because no such data from the sources you promised exists. Youre selling snake oil and hoping people buy it.

2) I don't care what position you take overall, and why should I? You post absolute nonsense on a regular basis, as evidenced by the thread I linked, in which you claimed one thing and linked an article that said the exact opposite.

3) No there isn't, unless you have some sort of partisan need to believe in unsupported propaganda. The evidence is huge, and growing daily as more and more papers are published.

4) Congress is full of shit and always has been. So what? The rest of your paragraph is appeal to emotion.

5) Appeal to emotion.

6) True. But irrelevant. The question is where does the energy come from and at what cost.

7) This is a lie. Post data or stfu.

8) This is also appeal to emotion, though cleverly couched. Still, you would have us think the only choices are "people or the planet." Complete crap.

9) No, it does not have the same validity as Mann's. It never will, because your entire argument is from an ideologic view that AGW is somehow in conflict with your belief that personal liberty is the primary value in all human life. Mann has been vetted by many scientists and scientific organizations. Who vetted your nonsense?

Precambrian atmosphere.


9) Well, it's nice to know that you're favoring of totalitarianism is out in the open now.

As for the emotional appeals gambit, those aren't appeals, those are consequences. I see that we have shifted a good deal of our CO2 emissions over to China, which is manufacturing the stuff we used to make. Soon enough we won't even be able to afford their shit. Mostly due to the heavy hand of government.

No, I don't buy AGW at this point in time. There is NO conclusive evidence to support the notion and I don't buy the 'what if it's true?' argument either in that there is a counter "what if" argument as well. It's going to take years to recover from this profligate waste of the taxpayers money chasing 'solutions' that aren't solutions because they just don't work.

Ishmael

Ishmael

 

[Sean]

Precambrian atmosphere.


9) Well, it's nice to know that you're favoring of totalitarianism is out in the open now.

As for the emotional appeals gambit, those aren't appeals, those are consequences. I see that we have shifted a good deal of our CO2 emissions over to China, which is manufacturing the stuff we used to make. Soon enough we won't even be able to afford their shit. Mostly due to the heavy hand of government.

No, I don't buy AGW at this point in time. There is NO conclusive evidence to support the notion and I don't buy the 'what if it's true?' argument either in that there is a counter "what if" argument as well. It's going to take years to recover from this profligate waste of the taxpayers money chasing 'solutions' that aren't solutions because they just don't work.

Ishmael

Ishmael

I know a little about the pre-cambrian. Geology A level.

 

[John Doe]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ll58u4BbTX1qdfru5o1_500.jpg

I must know her name.

 

[Peregrinator]

Precambrian atmosphere.


9) Well, it's nice to know that you're favoring of totalitarianism is out in the open now.


Ishmael

Ishmael

Classic. One paper, whose conclusion begins "Attempts to calculate the Earth’s atmospheric conditions before ∼2.2 Ga ago are fraught with difficulties because the Precambrian rock record is sparse when compared with that of the Phanerozoic" is your data proving that Mann is lying? Even to an audience with no knowledge of science at all, Ish, that's seriously bogus and you know it. That was a grasp for the last straw from the stuffing of the last deck chair. Just inhale and drown already.

9) My post indicated no such thing. The fact that you will go to any length and make whatever ridiculous specious argument you can think of in public in order to discredit a growing body of science in order to combat a threat you invented in your own paranoia has no bearing on my views at all.

And you signed that post twice.

Now, once again, for the studio audience, let's revisit the moment when you lost ll credibility in the discussion:

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=37990855&postcount=32

*chuckle*

Nice try Perg. I'm going to refute each and every single point that you posted, and I'm going to do it with data captured by many scientists that were out to support the whole AGW theory. Obviously this is going to take some time.

You have refuted not a single point I posted in that thread. You have not posted a shred of data "captured by" even a single "scientist that (was) out to prove the whole AGW theory."

Are you ever going to back up your words?

Or maybe just have another tantrum and call me some more names?

*chuckle*

 

[zipman]

Classic. One paper, whose conclusion begins "Attempts to calculate the Earth’s atmospheric conditions before ∼2.2 Ga ago are fraught with difficulties because the Precambrian rock record is sparse when compared with that of the Phanerozoic" is your data proving that Mann is lying? Even to an audience with no knowledge of science at all, Ish, that's seriously bogus and you know it. That was a grasp for the last straw from the stuffing of the last deck chair. Just inhale and drown already.

9) My post indicated no such thing. The fact that you will go to any length and make whatever ridiculous specious argument you can think of in public in order to discredit a growing body of science in order to combat a threat you invented in your own paranoia has no bearing on my views at all.

And you signed that post twice.

Now, once again, for the studio audience, let's revisit the moment when you lost ll credibility in the discussion:

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=37990855&postcount=32



You have refuted not a single point I posted in that thread. You have not posted a shred of data "captured by" even a single "scientist that (was) out to prove the whole AGW theory."

Are you ever going to back up your words?

Or maybe just have another tantrum and call me some more names?

*chuckle*

I'm going with option B because he's never going to back up his words.

Funny stuff though!

 

[Peregrinator]

I'm going with option B because he's never going to back up his words.

Funny stuff though!

I wanted to quote the post where he called me a metrosexual and a trust fund kid or something like that, but the search function appears to be kaput right now.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

I wanted to quote the post where he called me a metrosexual and a trust fund kid or something like that, but the search function appears to be kaput right now.

I remember seeing that. That's some serious flailing about even for Ish.

 

[Sean]

I wanted to quote the post where he called me a metrosexual and a trust fund kid or something like that, but the search function appears to be kaput right now.

Yeah, I was trying to find something last night and it wouldn't work. I think I'll bump the Rupert Murdoch thread though, just for a laugh.

 

[Peregrinator]

I remember seeing that. That's some serious flailing about even for Ish.

The funniest part about it to me is there's not a shred of truth to either allegation. I'm way more preppy than metro, and even at that I generally wear jeans and t-shirts. Lady P and a friend of mine from London who is, naturally, a complete fashion victim and clothes horse, are always trying to get me to at least try to look stylish. And I've never had, nor will I ever have, a trust fund. My father would give his money to the RNC before he'd handicap his kids with a life that easy.

Yeah, I was trying to find something last night and it wouldn't work. I think I'll bump the Rupert Murdoch thread though, just for a laugh.

That was also a funny one.

 

[phrodeau]

Did anybody notice this happening between the tits?

Biggest jump ever seen in global warming gases

By SETH BORENSTEIN
WASHINGTON

New U.S. Energy Department figures show the biggest jump ever in heat-trapping carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere last year.

That means levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago when they warned about the pace of man-made global warning. The increase in emissions was spurred by big pollution surges from China and India, which are building more coal-fired power plants.

Energy Department officials say an improving world economy in 2010 also contributed. China is the world's top producer of greenhouse gases, followed by the United States and India.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9QPE0301.htm

 

[zipman]

I wanted to quote the post where he called me a metrosexual and a trust fund kid or something like that, but the search function appears to be kaput right now.

I think right wingers throw out the metrosexual accusation to avoid being accused of homophobia if they had said homosexual. It's used to attempt to diminish someone's heterosexuality which is pretty funny to me.

 

[EllieTalbot]

So did everyone figure out when the world's going to end yet?

Worried in Wellington,
Ellie

 

[zipman]

So did everyone figure out when the world's going to end yet?

Worried in Wellington,
Ellie

Apparently it's when Lit's right wing has to admit that the climate-change skeptics are bozos. At least for them it is.

 

[Peregrinator]

I think right wingers throw out the metrosexual accusation to avoid being accused of homophobia if they had said homosexual. It's used to attempt to diminish someone's heterosexuality which is pretty funny to me.

I'm sure of it. Ish was clearly in drunk abusive mode that night, and knew he was "losing" the argument, so he reverted to his formative years and called me a fag, but was still aware enough to filter it through the rightwing squirrel engine.

 

[thør]

So did everyone figure out when the world's going to end yet?

Worried in Wellington,
Ellie

Endings can be new beginnings.

Sunning in South Anchorage

 

[Ishmael]

Classic. One paper, whose conclusion begins "Attempts to calculate the Earth’s atmospheric conditions before ∼2.2 Ga ago are fraught with difficulties because the Precambrian rock record is sparse when compared with that of the Phanerozoic" is your data proving that Mann is lying? Even to an audience with no knowledge of science at all, Ish, that's seriously bogus and you know it. That was a grasp for the last straw from the stuffing of the last deck chair. Just inhale and drown already.

9) My post indicated no such thing. The fact that you will go to any length and make whatever ridiculous specious argument you can think of in public in order to discredit a growing body of science in order to combat a threat you invented in your own paranoia has no bearing on my views at all.

And you signed that post twice.

Now, once again, for the studio audience, let's revisit the moment when you lost ll credibility in the discussion:

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=37990855&postcount=32



You have refuted not a single point I posted in that thread. You have not posted a shred of data "captured by" even a single "scientist that (was) out to prove the whole AGW theory."

Are you ever going to back up your words?

Or maybe just have another tantrum and call me some more names?

*chuckle*

What's the matter Perg, didn't understand the paper? Didn't read it? Do you even know what the area of 'uncertainty' is about? Didn't pay attention to the citations that show that that one paper references 20 others, that in turn reference even more? Papers that you could have easily followed up on had you the inclination, or were even a little bit curious about.

Did it occur to you that this paper is just one in an ongoing debate concerning Precambrian atmospheric CO2 concentrations?

I've posted tons of data, none of which you find acceptable so you continually assert that I've posted none at all. You're beginning to look foolish.

Ishmael

 

[Sean]

You're beginning to look foolish.

Ishmael

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=770739

 

[Bob Waters]

Industrial scale agriculture doesn't require as much fossil fuel as it currently uses. With further development of fertilizers and pesticides and more efficient farming and distribution, it wouldn't require any fossil fuels at all.

As for the first part of that statement: like what? Are you aware of anything under development or is that along the lines of 'we need to invent cold fusion to free us from our energy woes?' i.e. science or science fiction?

As for the second part of that; really? Like how? Bulldoze Long Island and turn it into a farm to support NYC? Who's going to produce the food? You going to turn urbanites into farmers? Google Pol Pot and see how well that worked out for him.

Attempting to reduce greenhouse gasses is admirable on it's own but it's a symptom and not the cause. The cause is population pressure but no one wants to address that - the right because it gets into abortion and birth control & government mandates and the left because it smacks of eugenics given that the world's fastest growing population centers are non-white.

 

[phrodeau]

As for the first part of that statement: like what? Are you aware of anything under development or is that along the lines of 'we need to invent cold fusion to free us from our energy woes?' i.e. science or science fiction?

As for the second part of that; really? Like how? Bulldoze Long Island and turn it into a farm to support NYC? Who's going to produce the food? You going to turn urbanites into farmers? Google Pol Pot and see how well that worked out for him.

Attempting to reduce greenhouse gasses is admirable on it's own but it's a symptom and not the cause. The cause is population pressure but no one wants to address that - the right because it gets into abortion and birth control & government mandates and the left because it smacks of eugenics given that the world's fastest growing population centers are non-white.

According to the commercials, this year's fertilizer is always better than last year's. And you don't need petroleum to make ammonia, piss will do.

We're a successful species and we want to stay that way. If there are solutions to population pressure issues that don't involve killing people or fouling the nest, we should pursue them.

You seem like an average guy. If there was no gas, could you manage to walk to the grocery store?

 

[Bob Waters]

According to the commercials, this year's fertilizer is always better than last year's. And you don't need petroleum to make ammonia, piss will do.

We're a successful species and we want to stay that way. If there are solutions to population pressure issues that don't involve killing people or fouling the nest, we should pursue them.

You seem like an average guy. If there was no gas, could you manage to walk to the grocery store?

Yes I could but not with ease. It would be a 4 mile RT - and I live closer than many in my town.

You don't need petroleum to make fertilizer but you do need it to power the factories that make it, power the trucks/trains that haul it to where it can be used and power the trucks/trains that haul the food to market.


As to solutions to population pressures, they've been advocated since the 60's - ZPG. They've gained no traction in most places. The only place they have had any success is China and look at the issues it's caused there. Good luck trying to enforce that here where people get freaked out by condom ads or worse in the developing world.

We're successful to the point we are due to being a high-energy consumption society. This (ability to feed more people and massive advances in health care that have reduced infant mortality and increased life span) has allowed an unprecedented population growth over the last 60 years. We (the world) are actually burning CLEANER than we ever have in history but there are just so damned many of us doing it that greenhouse gassing is unavoidable.

 

[patrick1]

What's the matter Perg, didn't understand the paper? Didn't read it? Do you even know what the area of 'uncertainty' is about? Didn't pay attention to the citations that show that that one paper references 20 others, that in turn reference even more? Papers that you could have easily followed up on had you the inclination, or were even a little bit curious about.

Did it occur to you that this paper is just one in an ongoing debate concerning Precambrian atmospheric CO2 concentrations?

I've posted tons of data, none of which you find acceptable so you continually assert that I've posted none at all. You're beginning to look foolish.

Ishmael

What a peculiarly intellectually snobbish, obscurantist and evasive note this is. Sheldon's five year old paper has some interesting stuff to say about a small corner of the debate about the temperature record and greenhouse gases: so what, exactly? Lots of other people have used his material and still concluded that modern-day anthropogenic global warming is, at the very least, a valid model.

I keep saying: I'm an agnostic in this debate. Convince me. Be prepared to assume I'm at least as clever as you, whichever 'side' of the debate you're on, that would be nice.

Patrick

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I'm sure of it. Ish was clearly in drunk abusive mode that night, and knew he was "losing" the argument, so he reverted to his formative years and called me a fag, but was still aware enough to filter it through the rightwing squirrel engine.

There was one night about two years ago that he was bored, lonely and since I was the only one up that night, started arguing with me over Prince, of all people. Dude was straining for a reason to stay online that night. I shudder to think what having a social dinner function with him would be like.

 

[Ishmael]

Not 'science' per se', but an interesting article none the less. Especially if you've been following the Sun spot cycle.

Cooling down?

Ishmael