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

#29965 Oct 2, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>I don't think the government can shut peoples minds down, son. You probably do, though!! Hell, you think they can even control the weather and climate....and you call others ignorant?
psssst.....find Mann's Nobel Prize yet, genius?
The Penn State professor, who holds a doctoral degree in geology and geophysics from Yale University, was one of the first scientists to document global rises in temperature. He was a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, including former Vice President Al Gore, which received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for developing and disseminating evidence of climate change. But criticism intensified when his and other climate scientists' emails containing controversial language were hacked and publicized, prompting investigations by Penn State, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Science Foundation, among other organizations, all of which "found the allegations of academic fraud to be baseless," the lawsuit states.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/envi...
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#29966 Oct 2, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>maybe you are, spell check queen?
LOL
find the 'prize' yet, son? maybe you can get your sicko friendo to help you look?!
LOL
"Recognizing that they cannot contest the science behind Dr. Mann's work, the defendants, contrary to known and clear fact, and intending to impose vicious injury, have nevertheless maliciously accused him of academic fraud, the most fundamental defamation that can be levied against a scientist and a professor," Mr. Mann's lawsuit states. "Unsatisfied with their lacerations of his professional reputation, defendants have also maliciously attacked Dr. Mann's personal reputation with the knowingly false comparison to a child molester."

Eight days after Mr. Steyn posted his blog, Mr. Mann demanded a retraction and apology. The National Review published Editor Rich Lowry's online response that explained the term "fraudulent" to mean "intellectually bogus and wrong," but without the connotation of criminal fraud.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/envi...
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#29967 Oct 2, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>"Recognizing that they cannot contest the science behind Dr. Mann's work, the defendants, contrary to known and clear fact, and intending to impose vicious injury, have nevertheless maliciously accused him of academic fraud, the most fundamental defamation that can be levied against a scientist and a professor," Mr. Mann's lawsuit states. "Unsatisfied with their lacerations of his professional reputation, defendants have also maliciously attacked Dr. Mann's personal reputation with the knowingly false comparison to a child molester."
Eight days after Mr. Steyn posted his blog, Mr. Mann demanded a retraction and apology. The National Review published Editor Rich Lowry's online response that explained the term "fraudulent" to mean "intellectually bogus and wrong," but without the connotation of criminal fraud.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/envi...
"Let’s not forget that much, if not all, of Mann’s lawsuit is an appeal to the DC court for it to uphold the rightness and sanctity of Mann’s beatified authority on all matters environmental. Therefore, lawyers for Steyn, Rand Simberg and their respective publishers, the National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, defendants in the case, may reasonably and fairly assert that for the past five years Mann has unscrupulously touted these false claims to unjustly further his personal, financial and political ambitions. With his saintly mantle shattered he can expect an onslaught of accusations of related scientific misconduct. PSU’s own policy statement suggests Mann has certainly breached their code of conduct"

http://johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2012/10/28...

What false claims, you ask?

That Mann won a Nobel prize.

Thanks for bringing this up again. It's been what... 3 or 4 hours since you stuck your foot in your mouth?

LOL
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#29968 Oct 2, 2013
It was you confusing CO with CO2, not anybody else for a long time. hahahaha

More on the man made CO2 malady:

“The Greenland sea is just a small part of the global ocean,” Cabrillo said.“However, the observed increase of 0.3 degrees in the deep Greenland sea is 10 times higher than the temperature increase in the global ocean on average.”

Until the early 1980s, the central Greenland sea had been mixed from the top to the bottom by winter cooling at the surface making waters dense enough to reach the sea floor and keep the water cool.

“This transfer of cold water from the top to the bottom has not occurred in the last 30 years,” Somavilla said.“However, relatively warm water continues to flow from the deep Arctic Ocean into the Greenland Sea.

“Cooling from above and warming through inflow are no longer balanced, and thus the Greenland Sea is progressively becoming warmer and warmer.”

Scientists say they need long-term observation on the Arctic Ocean to understand how the world’s oceans reacts to climate change.

That echoes the findings from the International Climate Change Panel report,“Climate Change 2013: the Physical Science Basis, released Sept. 27 which says “it is virtually certain” that the upper ocean has also warmed from 1971.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#29969 Oct 2, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
It was you confusing CO with CO2, not anybody else for a long time. hahahaha
More on the man made CO2 malady:
“The Greenland sea is just a small part of the global ocean,” Cabrillo said.“However, the observed increase of 0.3 degrees in the deep Greenland sea is 10 times higher than the temperature increase in the global ocean on average.”
Until the early 1980s, the central Greenland sea had been mixed from the top to the bottom by winter cooling at the surface making waters dense enough to reach the sea floor and keep the water cool.
“This transfer of cold water from the top to the bottom has not occurred in the last 30 years,” Somavilla said.“However, relatively warm water continues to flow from the deep Arctic Ocean into the Greenland Sea.
“Cooling from above and warming through inflow are no longer balanced, and thus the Greenland Sea is progressively becoming warmer and warmer.”
Scientists say they need long-term observation on the Arctic Ocean to understand how the world’s oceans reacts to climate change.
That echoes the findings from the International Climate Change Panel report,“Climate Change 2013: the Physical Science Basis, released Sept. 27 which says “it is virtually certain” that the upper ocean has also warmed from 1971.
"Scientists say they need long-term observation... to understand how the world’s oceans reacts..."

So they don't understand how it works, but are convinced that it does as they say.

Yeah... there's some logic for ya'.
Gee...

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#29970 Oct 2, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>The Penn State professor, who holds a doctoral degree in geology and geophysics from Yale University, was one of the first scientists to document global rises in temperature. He was a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, including former Vice President Al Gore, which received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for developing and disseminating evidence of climate change. But criticism intensified when his and other climate scientists' emails containing controversial language were hacked and publicized, prompting investigations by Penn State, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Science Foundation, among other organizations, all of which "found the allegations of academic fraud to be baseless," the lawsuit states.
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/envi...
thanks for the link, son! Did you notice there was no mention that Mann is Nobel winning scientist like you previously claimed?
Lol

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#29971 Oct 2, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
"Scientists say they need long-term observation... to understand how the world’s oceans reacts..."
So they don't understand how it works, but are convinced that it does as they say.
Yeah... there's some logic for ya'.
Gee...
funny how these "scientists" clearly go about things in such an unscientific way. I'm sure they aren't that bad in reality, but the IPCC cherry picks their findings and summarizes it all together in order to promote their agenda while leaving the scientists with a puzzled and embarrassed look on their faces.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#29972 Oct 2, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>thanks for the link, son! Did you notice there was no mention that Mann is Nobel winning scientist like you previously claimed?
Lol
You are welcome, mum. Your question is redundant. Read my post again for comprehension.

Thanks for trying to accept that I was right, you were wrong. It must be hard on your ideology.. err ego.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#29973 Oct 2, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
"Let’s not forget that much, if not all, of Mann’s lawsuit is an appeal to the DC court for it to uphold the rightness and sanctity of Mann’s beatified authority on all matters environmental.
Total bushwah. THE authority on science in the US is the NAS which has ALREADY rules that Mann's work is credible and good science. To claim otherwise (and it is not about 'all things environmental, it is about his science papers) is libel.

Plain and simple. The bench has no recourse but to side with the truth and the authorities that are empowered to monitor and maintain scientific credibility and excellence.
Mothra

Phoenix, AZ

#29974 Oct 2, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Total bushwah. THE authority on science in the US is the NAS which has ALREADY rules that Mann's work is credible and good science. To claim otherwise (and it is not about 'all things environmental, it is about his science papers) is libel.
Plain and simple. The bench has no recourse but to side with the truth and the authorities that are empowered to monitor and maintain scientific credibility and excellence.
If you'd read the article, you'd know that argument was made about Mann's claim he won a Nobel prize.

Do read some... you'd post less and stop emitting so much CO2 into the atmosphere.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#29975 Oct 2, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You are welcome, mum. Your question is redundant. Read my post again for comprehension.
Thanks for trying to accept that I was right, you were wrong. It must be hard on your ideology.. err ego.
apparently you have the comprehension problem, son.

you claimed Mann is a NOBEL WINNING SCIENTIST. i have yet to see a nobel with his name on it.

consider yourself being 'right' when you provide evidence that he won a nobel.

must be hard on your ego to be proven wrong and shown to be a habitual liar just like your bunghole buddy litesong.

lol

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

#29977 Oct 2, 2013
Poor rat wrote:
Gotta "love" the 8k flying blade "proof", since the blade didn't fly & it's another lie.....
Yep, deniers are REALLY poor liars, right "Bill" ???
Poor moniker, up to a million lies, huh ??
LMAOROFU!
Nice "life", loser !!
TRANSLATION: litesong can't refute what i say, so it just types some more ignorant shyt and looks more like a moron by the post.

where's that lawyers name and address, son?

where did you add to your fake stock longs position?

you're really bad at this.

how many monikers do you use, hypocrite?

bwaahahahahhaahahhahaa
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#29982 Oct 2, 2013
A denier who has no answer to a question about his claim of a wind generator part being thrown several kilometers posts:

an anti-wind website with some stories that do not relate, including one about a blade coming off a generator and hitting a daycare center ( which turned out to be a lie) and of a blade coming off a generator in the desert near San Diego.

a magazine article about a blade coming off a generator in the desert near San Diego.

a blog comment about a blade coming off a generator in the desert near San Diego.

Score: One lie, three mentions of the same event, and no mention of parts flying off wind generators and traveling kilometers.

About right.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#29984 Oct 3, 2013
Bushwhacker wrote:
Looks like little, lying, rat is wearing out the judge its, just like a tea twit dumb ----....
Gotta cut IT some slack, was probably hit by a wind mill blade flying 8k meters, right ???
Because it likes the peanuts itself.. oh not hit because it now calls other posters rodent, squirrel, etc.. still dumb lying a rug.. though.
Kyle

Wabash, IN

#29987 Oct 3, 2013
Mothra wrote:
<quoted text>
"Scientists say they need long-term observation... to understand how the world’s oceans reacts..."
So they don't understand how it works, but are convinced that it does as they say.
Yeah... there's some logic for ya'.
Gee...
I predicted that at least one denier scum would respond precisely this way as soon as I read that. According to dogmatic reality deniers, it makes no difference what scientists do know, even what they term near certainties, just as long as there's SOMETHING that they don't know. Any opening - any excuse - to invoke the denier mantra, "We don't understand anything; don't believe any conclusions; don;t take any action; just keep studying."

Yawn. Got anything new?
Kyle

Wabash, IN

#29988 Oct 3, 2013
Rational person: "Gotta "love" the 8k flying blade "proof", since the blade didn't fly & it's another lie.....
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>TRANSLATION: litesong can't refute what i say, so it just types some more ignorant shyt and looks more like a moron by the post.
So there you have it, an example of a climatard acting exactly like a creatard. When utterly unable to support a claim, both tard variants being incapable of admitting any failure, will invert the burden of proof in this blatant, childish ploy.
Let me blunt as hell. You've been nailed repeatedly from all directions for telling a blatant whopper. You claimed a physical impossibility on a matter that was tangential to a tangent at best. You've been given every opportunity to fess up, say that your memory failed you - anything at all - with essentially no impact on your (ahem) "arguments" against climate science. Yet you cannot do it. That is the depth of your pathology. Even though admitting to this inconsequential error could only help your (nonexistent) credibility, YOU CAN'T DO IT!
Now you have two choices. You can continue to illustrate that you're a compulsive liar with no interest in the truth or you can engage honestly for the very first time in 40,000 posts.
Anyone taking bets?

Judged:

45

45

44

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Wabash, IN

#29989 Oct 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>funny how these "scientists" clearly go about things in such an unscientific way. I'm sure they aren't that bad in reality, but the IPCC cherry picks their findings and summarizes it all together in order to promote their agenda while leaving the scientists with a puzzled and embarrassed look on their faces.
Completely contrary to reality as previously explained. The IPCC can only publish that to which all agree - that which the science clearly supports.

Judged:

45

44

44

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Wabash, IN

#29990 Oct 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>did i claim 8km, son? sorry, i don't remember....but apparently you think you do.
anyway....read above links.
i'm glad you've volunteered to be my topix bytch again. spaced blues was a little too dry and rigid.
give me some flavor and attitude!!!
Could you possibly make your lies just a little more obvious? You damn well that you made that claim. We have questioned you on that claim several times. Now you pretend that you don't remember making it?! Do you understand how pathological this makes you seem? Are you capable of truth - ever?

BTW, you do know that you go on a smack talking rant whenever you're cornered like a rat, don't you?

Judged:

45

44

44

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Wabash, IN

#29991 Oct 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>only public school educated 'folk' axe fo reparations, son
You're doing it again. That's denier scum's version of conceding that they've lied.

Judged:

51

50

50

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Kyle

Wabash, IN

#29992 Oct 3, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>of course they don't to you, son!! i no longer expect them to either.
you've been blinded by pseudoscience!!!
LOL
psssst.....can you tell me if strong weather events aren't connected to man made co2.....and temps have not been rising even with co2 emissions increasing.....why you're so afraid, angry little boi??
And again.

Judged:

52

52

51

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

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
Minnesota governor calls for Adrian Peterson's ... 25 min cowboy chris 32
Obama: Adrian Peterson Could Have Been My Son 9 hr Slewer 2
Meet the Minnesota Vikings All-Arrested team 17 hr slacker love child 14
Space ace Molested as a Child 18 hr The MasterDebater 4
Peterson Is Out, No He's In, No He's Out Again 18 hr The MasterDebater 8
OBAMA's ties to the MAINSTREAM LIBERAL MEDIA 19 hr MARK TRAINA - NAAWP 1
Joan Rivers' took selfie with unconscious star 19 hr Tweet While Driving 1
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••