Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

Full story: TwinCities.com

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.

Comments (Page 1,195)

Showing posts 23,881 - 23,900 of29,995
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25197
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
We know it is not water vapor because the scientists leave that variable out of their computer models...
Further evidence that the planet may burn up from 40 additional molecules of CO2.
You just lost, LOSER. You lost because you just simultaneously showed that you know nothing about the science and exposed your disinterest in learning anything about it.

Water vapor is ALL OVER the computer models, you simpering twit!
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25198
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you might have gotten confused. That's what happens you tell a lot of lies; it's hard to keep up with all of them.
Just yesterday, you admitted that sea level is rising and said on another thread that there was no proof of that. You might be confused, but there's something else. Everyone here is getting used to your new name, lyin' brian.
Indeed. One of the easiest ways for the non-scientifically minded to see the intellectual dishonesty of science deniers is to be exposed to the willingness of the many variations of denial to support each other against the science even though they are mutually exclusive. In the extreme - though by no means rare - individual science deniers support multiple, mutually exclusive, contradictory anti-science positions. They sometimes do so in the same paragraph.

This is dogmatic rejection of reality. It is PRECISELY the same phenomenon that one sees among 9-11 conspiracy theorists, moon landing hoaxers, Obama birthers, and most any conspiracy theory one can name.

This is not a coincidence. Science denial, whether it be creationism, climate denial, relativity denial, plate techtonics denial, heliocentrism denial, round earth denial, or rejection of any other scientific field or conclusion, IS conspiracism. They're just a subset of conspiracy theories.

And as with all CT'ists, science deniers are immune to rational discourse. I truly believe that it is a symptom of a particular type of brain "wiring".
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25199
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Where did you go, Lyin' Brian? I suppose you'll lie low for a while and then come back repeating your idiocies as if never refuted. Got to, right? I mean, it's your job, isn't it?

If it is your job, I again suggest that you get with your bosses because you're not helping your cause by being so blatantly non-responsive to criticisms.

If it's not your job, I suggest that you seek mental help. Whatever pathology leads you to such adamant and unending use of fallacies and lies cannot be healthy.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25200
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
You just lost, LOSER. You lost because you just simultaneously showed that you know nothing about the science and exposed your disinterest in learning anything about it.
Water vapor is ALL OVER the computer models, you simpering twit!
CO2 is the main 'variable' that drives AGW. Water vapor is represented as a "Positive Feedback" in the climate models. We appear to be debating Cause and Effect v Effect and Cause... as usual.

Post Script:
We are all losers if James Hansen, Phil Jones, Kevin Trenberth, and Mike Mann don't find a way to remove 40 molecules of Carbon Dioxide poison from the other 999,960 molecules in our atmosphere.
Bushwhacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25201
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

We debate nothing, you're a bagger mor-on....
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25202
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Recall that Lyin' Brian lied about the fact that rising CO2 cools the stratosphere. Even the deniers' favorite guy to quote - the tragically misguided Freeman Dyson, states that the cooling of the stratosphere is the most obvious and easiest to measure results of CO2 increases.

Just watch the first few seconds of the youtube video :

Freeman Dyson on Global Warming 2of2 Stratospheric Cooling

LOSER LOSES AGAIN.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25203
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
You just lost, LOSER. You lost because you just simultaneously showed that you know nothing about the science and exposed your disinterest in learning anything about it.
Water vapor is ALL OVER the computer models, you simpering twit!
It's like Chinese wispers.

Starts as clouds aren't in the models, and ends up as water vapour isn't.

Another idiot recently claimed it hadn't warmed for 15 years.

Probably heard there hadn't been statistically significant warming for 15 years and thought it meant the same thing.
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25204
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
CO2 is the main 'variable' that drives AGW. Water vapor is represented as a "Positive Feedback" in the climate models. We appear to be debating Cause and Effect v Effect and Cause... as usual.
Post Script:
We are all losers if James Hansen, Phil Jones, Kevin Trenberth, and Mike Mann don't find a way to remove 40 molecules of Carbon Dioxide poison from the other 999,960 molecules in our atmosphere.
Your BS doesn't make sense. Try again. State your argument clearly and completely. I pretty much know what denier arguments you;re alluding to but merely alluding to them is a dishonest denier tactic to make it harder to fillet their pitiful arguments.
Kyle

Cromwell, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25205
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Dont drink the koolaid wrote:

"We know it is not water vapor because the scientists leave that variable out of their computer models..."

THEN, Dont drink the koolaid wrote:

"Water vapor is represented as a "Positive Feedback" in the climate models."

The above are 100% contradictory; an indication of lying to anyone with any sense.

Science denier then wrote:

"We appear to be debating Cause and Effect v Effect and Cause... as usual."

Which is precisely what I explained previously when I showed - to anyone with any sense - that water vapor can ONLY be a dependent variable.

I accept your concession.

And finally, dishonest, illogical science dienier wrote:

"... find a way to remove 40 molecules of Carbon Dioxide poison from the other 999,960 molecules in our atmosphere."

Which is meant for the mentally challenged denier base that STILL hasn't grasped how RETARDED the argument is to ignore a 41% increase (soon to be 100%) of the primary GHG while throwing out rthe red herring - WITHOUT ANY LOGICAL ARGUMENT - that it is small compared to the IRRELEVANT non-GHG's.

One way to know that science deniers lack good arguments is their very heavy rotation of insanely poor arguments such as these.

Thanks for playing, LOSER.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25206
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Kyle wrote:
<quoted text> Try again. State your argument clearly and completely..
Hope this completely.clarifies (that means 'make clear') the argument: It is time for Dr. James Hansen, lead scientist of NASA's GISS (retired), to save the planet from The CO2 Caused Catastrophic Climate Change Crisis by doing what every science academy in the world recommends:
Subtract 40 molecules of CO2 from the rest of the 999,960 remaining molecules of air.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25207
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Kyle wrote:
But you have to be a sentient being to acknowledge and respond to critique, eh LOSER?
You get to choose how to respond or not respond. Human freedom trumps insults, you have the power to be amused instead of offended when insulted. Get a grip on rationality; ad hominem arguments are fallacies.

.
Kyle wrote:
A sentient being wouldn't remain stuck on a 5th grade conception of the scientific method after endless refutations, nor would it fail to acknowledge said refutations.
There's never been a field experiment of climate change mitigation published in a peer reviewed journal; that's not a refuted fact. We all agree, we've even seen lab experiments that demonstrate the warming effect of CO2 far lower than the IPCC's best guesses.

.
Kyle wrote:
A sentient being wouldn't ignore multiple request to apply their conception of science equally to other scientific fields even after this failure to respond has been exposed repeatedly.
Here's where we differ, sentience isn't enough. I feel Kyle's fear of man made global warming and understand his perception of proof, his faith. That's not the ability to reason, sentience is the ability to feel; global warming alarmism is irrational.
Bushwacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25208
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Blathering BS, by the spammer/child....
Bushwacker

Kent, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25209
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

Endless repetition of utterly destroyed nonsense argument = just another concession. You have no shame. Apparently, you also have no idea what effect you're having on your cause, either.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25210
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

drink the kkk-aid wrote:
CO2 is the main 'variable' that drives AGW. Water vapor is represented as a "Positive Feedback" in the climate models.
More precisely, descriptively & accurately:

Increasing man-made GHGs, infra-red energy absorbing, non-phase change CO2, methane, nitrogen oxides, SF6, etc. control average, atmospheric amounts of GHG, infra-red energy absorbing, phase change water vapor.
litesong

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25211
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

drink the kkk-aid wrote:
Subtract 40 molecules of CO2 from the rest of the 999,960 remaining molecules of air.
Since almost 99% of the atmosphere is comprised of non-GHG gases, 40 molecules of CO2 must be removed from less than 10,000 GHG molecules. Since CO2 naturally & slowly reduces itself in the atmosphere, the easiest way to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, is to reduce man-made CO2 pumped into the atmosphere.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25212
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Sea levels rise and fall, trends don't tell us anything about right now and the future, just about the past. Recent geological trends show sea levels slowly rising; don't panic. The Dutch have recovered more land than they've lost.
Climate change is real, climate change mitigation is a hoax and man made catastrophic climate change alarmism is pseudoscience. That's objectively true because there are no experimental tests for climate change mitigation. The verifiable qualities of prescription drugs are experimentally tested but climate quackery of restricting CO2 emissions or funding carbon sinks has never had that degree of scrutiny.
Trends don't tell us anything about right now and the future? Well, that'll be news to the rest of the world. If you are right and the rest of the world is so wrong, you're in line for a Nobel, dude.

Did you ever tell anyone what's causing this climate change? No, because then your mitigation argument would fall apart. But you don't have an argument anyway.

The earth is a lot bigger than a pill, you unmitigated idiot.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25213
Apr 20, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
Since almost 99% of the atmosphere is comprised of non-GHG gases, 40 molecules of CO2 must be removed from less than 10,000 GHG molecules. Since CO2 naturally & slowly reduces itself in the atmosphere, the easiest way to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, is to reduce man-made CO2 pumped into the atmosphere.
Assuming the current level of atmospheric CO2 is 390ppm how many molecules did man put into the air... 4, 14, perhaps 40? More than that?
-koolaid

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25214
Apr 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
Assuming the current level of atmospheric CO2 is 390ppm how many molecules did man put into the air... 4, 14, perhaps 40? More than that?
-koolaid
40% gramps.

.4x390=156ppm.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25215
Apr 21, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

gcaveman1 wrote:
Trends don't tell us anything about right now and the future? Well, that'll be news to the rest of the world.
Not really, trends show whatever you want, depending on the start and end point.

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
If you are right and the rest of the world is so wrong, you're in line for a Nobel, dude.
Not really:
[Article] The Fallacies of Trend Extrapolation and Reliance Upon Exogenous Causality
2009, ECONOMY, FINANCIAL MARKETS, RESEARCH, SOCIONOMICS

Conventional models of social causality stand in contrast to the socionomic perspective. Robert Prechter explained the difference in the May and June 2004 issues of the Elliott Wave Theorist. When most people forecast cultural trends, they default to a Newtonian physics paradigm: An object in motion tends to remain in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. An intuitive understanding of this law, Prechter observed, is a useful product of evolution and helps us handle physical objects with ease. But cultural trends are not physical entities.

Economists who view cultural trends like physical objects in motion perpetuate two fallacies.

1) They extrapolate the current trend into the future.
2) They believe an event must happen to change the trendís direction....

Read more: http://www.socionomics.net/2009/09/the-fallac...

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
Did you ever tell anyone what's causing this climate change? No, because then your mitigation argument would fall apart. But you don't have an argument anyway.
I don't know what causes climate change, it always changes and I understand there's nothing I can do about it. I've never seen a compelling experimental test for climate change mitigation, have you?

.
gcaveman1 wrote:
The earth is a lot bigger than a pill, you unmitigated idiot.
And climate is the largest, most chaotic and complex system on Earth. We can't mitigate climate change; if we could there would be a demonstration showing a man made global climate change. Don't buy a pig in a poke.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25216
Apr 21, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
40% gramps.
.4x390=156ppm.
Man is responsible for 156ppm of all the CO2 in he air... is that correct?
How much of that CO2 should be removed so the Earth will no longer be at risk from Catastrophic Climate
Change?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 23,881 - 23,900 of29,995
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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 Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••