Scientists say they have proved climate change is real, now mus...

[litesong]

phud fetid feces face wrote:

commanders of cut and paste useless babble.......whack whack whack.... really really..... Hay.....the three whackers .......gee

"phud fetid feces face" fails at everything, except repeated,'cut and paste useless babble.......whack whack whack.... really really..... Hay.....the three whackers .......gee'.

[Patriot AKA Bozo]

titonton divaunte pants wrote:

Oh shyte. I ruined the planet with my toyota tercel. Better take all my wealth and enslave me.

Is this Toyota Tercel reunion day? I had a 1980 and ran it for about 24 years. Efficient, basic and tough.

[PHD]

pinheadlitesout wrote:

<quoted text>
I had a Tercel. I got 40mpg on the highway with good featherfooting. More than that, my Tercel was tough. Had a full head-on collision(were still touching after the accident) with a car 40% heavier than the Tercel. The Toyota saved our lives, even without airbags. The engine compartment was collapsed on the drivers side & the passenger compartment instrument panel was severely widely cracked & starting to intrude into the passenger compartment. But it held up, doing its job.

Now if we can get you to do your own work that would be another miracle. We also understand now why you have mental issues. You may have thought you escaped without injury but go get another check up from the neck up. These injuries sometimes show up years later.

[Patriot AKA Bozo]

PHD wrote:

<quoted text>Now if we can get you to do your own work that would be another miracle. We also understand now why you have mental issues. You may have thought you escaped without injury but go get another check up from the neck up. These injuries sometimes show up years later.

This comes from the mentality of a mole. Whaqxc.
BTW, A new subspecies has been identified; Scalopus aquaticus Phd. Or for short, SAP

[ChromiuMan]

PHD wrote:

SpacedoutBlues
Patriot AKA I'm a Bozo
ChromiuselessMan
Now there are the commanders of cut and paste useless babble. They go whack whack whack all day everyday because the really really don't know. Now that’s precious. Hay you three could be called the three whackers gee that’s precious.

Whack, whack, whacking yourself on the back for not contributing anything of value, PHD? Looking over the past several months, you don't actually seem to have anything to contribute except one-liner, "...useless babble tainted with hate covered with spam hot air..."

By the way, the key just to the left of the period is called a comma.
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas...

[PHD]

ChrominusMan wrote:

<quoted text>
Whack, whack, whacking yourself on the back for not contributing anything of value, PHD? Looking over the past several months, you don't actually seem to have anything to contribute except one-liner, "...useless babble tainted with hate covered with spam hot air..."
By the way, the key just to the left of the period is called a comma.
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas...

If you had anything to offer besides useless babble maybe there would be something of use you add to answer. One liner is a simple thing for you to comprehend and we see that is a difficult task for you also. So show all your own work instead of that cut and paste thing you offer.

[Brian_G]

ChromiuMan wrote:

Whack, whack, whacking yourself on the back for not contributing anything of value, PHD? Looking over the past several months, you don't actually seem to have anything to contribute except one-liner, "...useless babble tainted with hate covered with spam hot air..."
By the way, the key just to the left of the period is called a comma.
[URL deleted]

^^^All he has is defamation. He hasn't replied to Saturday's post because he doesn't understand how science works.

[titonton divaunte pants]

litesong wrote:

<quoted text>
I had a Tercel. I got 40mpg on the highway with good featherfooting. More than that, my Tercel was tough. Had a full head-on collision(were still touching after the accident) with a car 40% heavier than the Tercel. The Toyota saved our lives, even without airbags. The engine compartment was collapsed on the drivers side & the passenger compartment instrument panel was severely widely cracked & starting to intrude into the passenger compartment. But it held up, doing its job.

yeah. Unibody. Cutting edge shyte eh? All spot welded. B-)

[titonton divaunte pants]

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:

<quoted text>
Is this Toyota Tercel reunion day? I had a 1980 and ran it for about 24 years. Efficient, basic and tough.

very nice! High five!

[titonton divaunte pants]

The only answer to this problem is to take peoples money, and if they don't have any make them slaves. To save the planet. In the name of science we must kill you to reduce greenhouse gas.

[PHD]

It's still all about the money!!!

[PHD]

More news from the scientist a must read.

http://now.msn.com/fish-cannot-feel-pain-says...

[PHD]

Science explanation of measurements.

A measurement system can be accurate but not precise, precise but not accurate, neither, or both. For example, if an experiment contains a systematic error, then increasing the sample size generally increases precision but does not improve accuracy. The result would be a consistent yet inaccurate string of results from the flawed experiment. Eliminating the systematic error improves accuracy but does not change precision.

[Patriot AKA Bozo]

PHD wrote:

Science explanation of measurements.
A measurement system can be accurate but not precise, precise but not accurate, neither, or both. For example, if an experiment contains a systematic error, then increasing the sample size generally increases precision but does not improve accuracy. The result would be a consistent yet inaccurate string of results from the flawed experiment. Eliminating the systematic error improves accuracy but does not change precision.

To explain the difference3 between precision and accuracy, consider shooting at a target. Precision is how tight the grouping is, accuracy is how close to the bullseye they are.

[ChromiuMan]

Brian_G wrote:

<quoted text>In 1750, Benjamin Franklin proposed an experimental test of lightning strike mitigation using a kite. Thomas-François Dalibard tested that theory sucessfully. This is how experiments work in science and technology.
.
<quoted text>Crop rotation to mitigate soil nitrogen exhaustion has been taught and practiced since Roman times. There have been ample experimental tests on the utility of crop rotation.
.
<quoted text>Svante August Arrhenius proposed a theory of climate change from the greenhouse gas effect in 1896. To this day, that theory hasn't been experimentally tested in the atmosphere.
See the difference between the mature technologies of architecture, agriculture and the hoax of mitigating climate change?

Actually, the only part of your statements I disagree with is the use of the word 'hoax'. If man-made emissions contribute to global warming, it follows that a cessation of those emissions would not contribute to global warming. Stopping the use of fossil fuels while simultaneously reducing atmospheric CO2 and finding a means of making the Earth more reflective would mitigate climate change. That in itself refutes the term 'hoax', even if those activities are purely speculative fantasy.

However, is it practical or feasible for man to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere? Is it even possible? I'm unaware of any quick and easy means of carbon capture and storage that could possibly make a dent in offsetting the amounts we produce, much less significantly reduce the amount of CO2 already present in the atmosphere, so I understand your point - I just disagree with your phrasing.

[PHD]

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:

<quoted text>
To explain the difference3 between precision and accuracy, consider shooting at a target. Precision is how tight the grouping is, accuracy is how close to the bullseye they are.

Accuracy would be on target not how close you are.

[litesong]

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
To explain the difference3 between precision and accuracy, consider shooting at a target. Precision is how tight the grouping is, accuracy is how close to the bullseye they are.
/////////
'phud fetid feces face' theorization flopped out:
Accuracy would be on target not how close you are.
//////////
litesong wrote:
It is easier to accurize with an instrument of precision.

[PHD]

litesong wrote:

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
To explain the difference3 between precision and accuracy, consider shooting at a target. Precision is how tight the grouping is, accuracy is how close to the bullseye they are.
/////////
'I pinheadlitesout fetid feces face' flopped out:
Accuracy would be on target not how close you are.
//////////
pinhedlitesout wrote:
It is easier to accurize with an instrument of precision.

If you even had a clue you would know there is no such thing as accurate in shooting a weapon. The only thing in shooting accurate is when you’re flapping your lips. You’re right on target when it comes to useless babble tainted with hate. Did you get that check up from the neck up? My bad you could achieve an accurate shot in a vacuum much like your one brain cell.

[Rahm Jizzbucket Emanuel]

For the love of God, we need to save the polar bears people!

[PHD]

Why?