Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming, one day after President Barack Obama renewed his call for climate legislation. Full Story
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#24495 Mar 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Global warming is faith based, not science based.
Where's your science?

Since: Nov 11

United States

#24496 Mar 19, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Yes they practice scientific science fiction scare tactics. See what happens when you catch them in their lies. They spend hours casting their bad judgments against you and anyone that bucks their scientific science fiction scare tactics.
Today in Ohio is 35 degrees Farengeith Global Warming hot!

Since: Nov 11

United States

#24497 Mar 19, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>Says the denier jackass that refuses to acknowledge when I post science that clearly defeats his BS.

Why don't you be a man and respond to the clear facts that I've posted elsewhere that undeniably lay the blame for warming on GHG's? Hmmm? Only denier scum run from facts to spread lies elsewhere.
Because I had already proven your facts wrong! Why repeat myself?

See? I can find any site that proves you wrong but you will refuse to accept their facts!!!

But you will accept any childish refutation of my facts!!

So if my point and yours are both proven wrong by different scientists, you will only pick the ones that refutes mine as the final authority!

That is how we know GW is a HOAX!

Since: Nov 11

United States

#24498 Mar 19, 2013
Iowan wrote:
We need to save planet earth
By raising taxes so Liberals can play more golf!

How convenient!

Hey! Talking about golf balls. Does golf balls breakdown or do they hurt the environment?

Ask Al Gore and Obama after their golf game!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24499 Mar 19, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Because it's NOT the same, simpleton. Pretty sad, you believe in baldness cures ! LMAOROTFU~!
Most climate change alarmists believe in climate change mitigation because they don't understand science, they believe because of emotion, fear.

You can learn which baldness cures work by looking at the experimental record:

Male pattern baldness

Male pattern baldness is the most common type of hair loss in men...

Two medications are approved to treat male pattern baldness:

Minoxidil (Rogaine) is a solution that you apply directly to the scalp to stimulate the hair follicles. It slows hair loss for many men, and some men grow new hair. Hair loss returns when you stop using this medicine.

Finasteride (Propecia, Proscar) is a pill that interferes with the production of a certain male hormone linked to baldness. It slows hair loss. It works a bit better than minoxidil. Hair loss returns when you stop using this medicine.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/artic...

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24500 Mar 19, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Where's your science?
Where's a publication of any experimental test of climate change mitigation?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24501 Mar 19, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
Yes, & there was no experimental evidence that we could go to the Moon in 1963 when President Kennedy proposed we do it. You are just one of the pessimists who GUARANTEE failure before they even try.
The history of rocketry goes back to 1232, rockets have been improved by numerous experimental tests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rocke...

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
What would happen if you started a business with the attitude "I KNOW this business is going to fail"? What if Jeff Bezos had had that attitude when he started Amazon? After all, there was no experimental evidence his business model could work.
Bezos graduated from Princeton, I'm sure he's heard of mail order retailing. He wrote Amazon's business plan in 1994, based on real world tests, not theoretical models. He'd already the success of other online retailers.

.
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
You must have had a very tough time in life. Have you ever done ANYTHING worthwhile?
Rockets and Amazon are extensions of previously tried technology; there's never been a single test, trial or experiment that shows its possible to mitigate climate change. Bezos did his due diligence, he went to investors with a working model, not a computer model.

Climate change mitigation is a hoax because there's no record of any successful experimental test that shows its possible.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24502 Mar 19, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Because it's NOT the same, simpleton. Pretty sad, you believe in baldness cures ! LMAOROTFU~!
Please note, the FDA approved Minoxidil and Finasteride because the experimental data showed they work and don't cause excessive harm. If there was a similar record for climate change mitigation, I'd be on your side promoting mitigation. There's no experimental record of any man made climate change, that's why its a hoax.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#24503 Mar 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Where's a publication of any experimental test of climate change mitigation?
That's not a response to my question, where's your science?

I understand this is important to you; but where's your science?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24504 Mar 19, 2013
martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
By raising taxes so Liberals can play more golf!
How convenient!
Hey! Talking about golf balls. Does golf balls breakdown or do they hurt the environment?
Ask Al Gore and Obama after their golf game!
Remember, Jose, a revenue-neutral carbon tax removes ZERO money from the economy & adds ZERO money to government. The chances that "liberals can play more golf" is ZERO.

A carbon tax simply distributes money from high to low carbon emitters. It's the best way to begin to save human lives & civilization - assuming it's stiff enough.

BTW, NOBODY spent more time on the golf course than Ike. Yet he was a great president.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24505 Mar 19, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember, Jose, a revenue-neutral carbon tax removes ZERO money from the economy & adds ZERO money to government. The chances that "liberals can play more golf" is ZERO.
A carbon tax simply distributes money from high to low carbon emitters. It's the best way to begin to save human lives & civilization - assuming it's stiff enough.
BTW, NOBODY spent more time on the golf course than Ike. Yet he was a great president.
Correction: "liberals" COULD play more golf if they were low carbon emitters. However, golf courses are environmentally destructive, so they might be more expensive.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#24506 Mar 19, 2013
Hi folks, this goes on 24/7. Deniers come here to post the same. Here's todays's crop on this page:

Denier1 posted: "So if my point and yours are both proven wrong by different scientists, you will only pick the ones that refutes mine as the final authority!

That is how we know GW is a HOAX!

Denier2 posted: "There's no experimental record of any man made climate change, that's why its a hoax."

As you can see, they are not science-based. When we ask questions, they repeat the same or ask another question. Because they are without basis.
PHD

Overton, TX

#24507 Mar 19, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
If you meant angel, we understand...Either way, you're really dumb. Just dumb and bumbler in a single toilet bowl...
And you want more. Better to be dumb than to be a DUMB ASSumption OF YOUR----SELF. As mentioned before there is not a toilet bowl large enough known to mankind that could be utilized to flush you down. The superfund couldn't cover the expense of your disposal.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24508 Mar 19, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
Hi folks, this goes on 24/7. Deniers come here to post the same. Here's todays's crop on this page:
Denier1 posted: "So if my point and yours are both proven wrong by different scientists, you will only pick the ones that refutes mine as the final authority!
That is how we know GW is a HOAX!
Denier2 posted: "There's no experimental record of any man made climate change, that's why its a hoax."
As you can see, they are not science-based. When we ask questions, they repeat the same or ask another question. Because they are without basis.
Yes, 24/7. Some threads here are relatively old, going back to 2010, or even 2008. Way back then, the deniers were saying the same things - even some of the SAME PEOPLE as today. Realists & deniers are not likely to agree any time soon. The deniers know just enough science to convince themselves they're right, no matter how many scientific facts we give them.

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n10...

As the effects of AGW/CC become more & more obvious, some deniers may come around, but the oil monied interests will fight tooth & nail. So far they've been remarkably successful in confusing the public. No doubt some of their paid agents are here.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#24509 Mar 19, 2013
Contrary to the propaganda, people nowhere decide on public policy whether in the West nor in the East. Look at the Iraqi war about which now the US majority says it was a mistake. Obviously, the public's decision was suppressed regarding this war.

Nature:[Our] result suggests that public divisions over climate change stem not from the public’s incomprehension of science but from a distinctive conflict of interest: between the personal interest individuals have in forming beliefs in line with those held by others with whom they share close ties and the collective one they all share in making use of the best available science to promote common welfare.

Thanks for your comment, HSL.
PHD2 Reality

Minneapolis, MN

#24510 Mar 19, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Splained plenty of times.
The Arctic has had 24 hours of darkness for nearly 6 months. Been really cold up there. But man-made excess energy in the atmosphere has occasionally but more vigorously pushed warmth into the Arctic. Simultaneously, cold Arctic fronts are pushed to the south. Often while the Arctic is excessively warm, southern climes are excessively cold.
South Pole Conditions at Mar 19, 2013 - 01:50 PM EDTMar 19, 2013 - 12:50 PM CDTMar 19, 2013 - 11:50 AM MDTMar 19, 2013 - 10:50 AM PDTMar 19, 2013 - 09:50 AM ADTMar 19, 2013 - 07:50 AM HST
2013.03.19 1750 UTC
Wind from the SSE (150 degrees) at 14 MPH (12 KT)
Visibility 2 mile(s)
Sky conditions overcast
Weather Ice crystals
Mist
Temperature -58 F (-50 C)
Windchill -92 F (-69 C)

==========

North Pole Weather Today

Mar 19

Mostly sunny and very cold 6° Lo -16°

Wed

Mar 20

Mostly cloudy and very cold 5° Lo -20°

Thu

Mar 21

Partly sunny and very cold 7° Lo -11°

Fri

Mar 22

Cloudy and very cold1 5° Lo 4°

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24511 Mar 19, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
That's not a response to my question, where's your science? I understand this is important to you; but where's your science?
My science is in the experimental record; there' no demonstration of any climate change mitigation working and no experiments showing man made climate change. The science isn't behind climate change mitigation technology, the science is with the skeptics. If you could show it works, wouldn't that be an easier sell?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#24512 Mar 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>My science is in the experimental record; there' no demonstration of any climate change mitigation working and no experiments showing man made climate change. The science isn't behind climate change mitigation technology, the science is with the skeptics. If you could show it works, wouldn't that be an easier sell?
LIAR.

Science is not telling you.

Give it up.

P.S. You are no more skeptic than a piece of rock. Look it up in an English dictionary. Like you looked up "hype."

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#24513 Mar 19, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
LIAR.
I assume my opponents are mistaken, I don't accuse them of dishonesty. This is where we differ.

SpaceBlues hasn't provided that citation for a compelling experimental test, maybe it slipped his mind.

Think I'll send a reminder when I get around to it.

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
Science is not telling you.
???

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
Give it up.
Notice, when rational argument fails, global warming alarmists like to bully and tell you what to do?

.
SpaceBlues wrote:
P.S. You are no more skeptic than a piece of rock. Look it up in an English dictionary. Like you looked up "hype."
OK:

Definition of SKEPTICISM

1: an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object

2
a : the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain
b : the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism characteristic of skeptics

3: doubt concerning basic religious principles (as immortality, providence, and revelation)
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#24514 Mar 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I assume my opponents are mistaken, I don't accuse them of dishonesty. This is where we differ.
SpaceBlues hasn't provided that citation for a compelling experimental test, maybe it slipped his mind.
Think I'll send a reminder when I get around to it.
.
<quoted text>???
.
<quoted text>Notice, when rational argument fails, global warming alarmists like to bully and tell you what to do?
.
<quoted text>OK:
Definition of SKEPTICISM
1: an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object
2
a : the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is uncertain
b : the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism characteristic of skeptics
3: doubt concerning basic religious principles (as immortality, providence, and revelation)
English is not understood by you.

First, you don't meet the definition of a skeptic. Yet you often call yourself such.

Second, I pointed out to you earlier that you did not understand the words in your demand from science. You then gave me as a reply a definition for "hype."

Third, in the post I responded last you claimed "My science is in the experimental record."

That's why I call you a LIAR for those reasons and more. Look up "liar."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Obama Owns Ebola 32 min Obama the best 28
How to clear out a High School Gym in short order. 52 min cowboy chris 3
Can't manage the gov & NOT honest or trustworthy (Nov '13) 3 hr LIbEralS 271
Woman's head stepped on by Rand Paul supporters (Oct '10) Sun Bill 26,311
Twin Cities: lowest metro unemployment rate in US Sun Imma Gunna 20
Solargate, Obama donor goes bankrupt (Sep '11) Sun Billy 75
free stuff Sat Space ace 3
Minneapolis Dating
Find my Match

Minneapolis Jobs

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Minneapolis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Minneapolis

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]