Global warming 'undeniable,' scientis...

Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say

There are 35847 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jul 29, 2010, titled Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#30125 Oct 14, 2013
The Abstruse Polymath wrote:
<quoted text>
If you believe that was MY quote, one is left with the inescapable conclusion that you are an idiot, or simply have brain damage.
To boot, your use of the Latin Quod erat demonstrandum is incorrect as there was nothing in your previous posts that posit your challenge of determining "marble-headedness", thus it was NOT to be proved.
It's funny when little kids use words they don't understand.:)
WOW you get the moron cake!

You demonstrated that you are MARBLE HEAD, DUH! AGAIN, btw.

P.S. The denier prep school was short on intelligence and wit. This new denier is so much moron in a fun way. Having a marble head gives it a badly low self-esteem. Fun, fun ewww..

“Earth's #1 Brain.”

Since: Oct 13

Norvelt

#30126 Oct 14, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>WOW you get the moron cake!
You demonstrated that you are MARBLE HEAD, DUH! AGAIN, btw.
P.S. The denier prep school was short on intelligence and wit. This new denier is so much moron in a fun way. Having a marble head gives it a badly low self-esteem. Fun, fun ewww..
Poor little chicken little. Does it make you cranky to have your ignorance of argument and proof exposed? Does it make you cry when someone explains that a declarative staement in not an argument, therefore there was no "that" in that which was to be proved?

Or did you wet your diaper?

“Earth's #1 Brain.”

Since: Oct 13

Norvelt

#30127 Oct 14, 2013
No, no, I'm sure it wasn't your fault, ... I'm sure it was the evil oil companies' conspiracy to wreck the climate just to indict your bladder control by causing anthropogenic accumulated moisture in your diaper.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Earth's #1 Brain.”

Since: Oct 13

Norvelt

#30129 Oct 15, 2013
Slew Wins wrote:
I once used meaningless rhetoric, like you... but I got a life.
Try it, dip....
SpaceBlues,... Take the phone, it's for you.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#30132 Oct 15, 2013
The Abstruse Polymath wrote:
<quoted text>
SpaceBlues,... Take the phone, it's for you.
You .. are FIRED!

“Earth's #1 Brain.”

Since: Oct 13

Norvelt

#30133 Oct 15, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>You .. are FIRED!
No doubt you think everyone is FIREd due to the sky is falling warming.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
SpaceBlues

United States

#30138 Oct 16, 2013
Denialist Crank wrote:
Oil is natural! I'mmagonna go drink some!
rip

“Earth's #1 Brain.”

Since: Oct 13

Norvelt

#30140 Oct 16, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>rip
Now if we can only "space" Mr. Blues over here.

Since: Sep 11

Rogers, MN

#30141 Oct 16, 2013
Kyle wrote:
<quoted text>
I just love it when a denier tries to sound all sciency and presents stupid shite and glaring mistakes while doing so.
This moron is either so clueless as to think that climate scientists ignore solar activity or thinks you are.
As for some of his other arguments? He's simultaneously stating a fallacious argument from ignorance and proposing causations that are laughably improbable.
While your response is truly well thought out, no doubt thoroughly researched, and very "sciency", I will try and form a response. No one has ever argued that the earth has gone through a number of warming and cooling cycles over it's lifetime. And both warming and cooling in very recent years as well. But the fact remains that anyone who believes they have proven that mankind is the sole cause of, or a major contributor to, this phenomenon is ignoring 4.5 billion years of history. Thinking that a few decades of temperature monitoring is proof that mankind is the primary cause of changing climates is not science. It is quite obviously about the money, not the science or the environment or saving the race.
You may have noticed that Algore has become a very wealthy man thanks to his carbon credit scams and fear mongering movie, books, and lecture tours. In the process using up more energy that several small towns all by himself.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#30142 Oct 16, 2013
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
While your response is truly well thought out, no doubt thoroughly researched, and very "sciency", I will try and form a response. No one has ever argued that the earth has gone through a number of warming and cooling cycles over it's lifetime. And both warming and cooling in very recent years as well. But the fact remains that anyone who believes they have proven that mankind is the sole cause of, or a major contributor to, this phenomenon is ignoring 4.5 billion years of history. Thinking that a few decades of temperature monitoring is proof that mankind is the primary cause of changing climates is not science. It is quite obviously about the money, not the science or the environment or saving the race.
You may have noticed that Algore has become a very wealthy man thanks to his carbon credit scams and fear mongering movie, books, and lecture tours. In the process using up more energy that several small towns all by himself.
cantmakeitup, you sure can't make it up. What you made up sucks!
LessHypeMoreFact

Etobicoke, Canada

#30145 Oct 16, 2013
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
While your response is truly well thought out, no doubt thoroughly researched, and very "sciency"
It shows a little of your belief system to call it 'sciency' instead of recognizing it as science. Obviously you are a POOR judge of what is science and what is 'sciency'.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
I will try and form a response.
You do that. And you might try to RESEARCH it instead of forming a response from imaginary expertise.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
No one has ever argued that the earth has gone through a number of warming and cooling cycles over it's lifetime.
What you miss (not being interested in science) is that EACH ONE of those warming and cooling periods had a REASON behind it. Science and the age of reason tells us this and we have yet to find a credible case of 'spontaneous miracles'.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
And both warming and cooling in very recent years as well.
And each of THOSE trends had a 'cause' we can determine. Mostly the 1880 to 1945 period was dominated by warming from the 200 year solar cycle, the 1945 to 1975 period was dominated by cooling from smog (sulphate aerosols) countering the GHG warming that had started, and the 1975 to 2013 period is characterized by strong warming from GHGs.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
But the fact remains that anyone who believes they have proven ..
1: Science provides a 'well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. Proof is not defined for anything outside of mathematics. Unless you take my 'definition' that proof is a 'convincing and reasoned argument supported by fact, and capable of convincing people educated in the facts of the issue'. If you think about what people CALL proof, you will find it fits.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
that mankind is the sole cause of, or a major contributor to, this phenomenon is ignoring 4.5 billion years of history.
Nope. Science determined what caused THIS warming. It does not 'ignore' the rest of history but it cannot presume causation from something that happened a billion years ago. Please get a clue.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
Thinking that a few decades of temperature monitoring is proof that mankind is the primary cause of changing climates is not science.
Of course not. Just monitoring temperature tells us that the global surface is warming but not WHY. Their was decades of science before the scientist were satisfied that the AGW explanation was solid theory. And YOU are not a judge of science. The NAS is.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
It is quite obviously about the money, not the science or the environment or saving the race.
This tells me a lot about YOU. That you are 'all about money' and 'scams'. But it doesn't show ANYTHING about AGW science.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
You may have noticed that Algore has become a very wealthy man thanks to his carbon credit scams and fear mongering movie, books, and lecture tours.
Again, irrelevant. Al Gore was rich long before AGW and money makes money. Nice of you to admit that he EARNED a lot of that will his talks and lectures. But the SCIENCE has no dependence on Al Gore. He merely talks about it.
cantmakeitup wrote:
<quoted text>
In the process using up more energy that several small towns all by himself.
Rich people do use more resources. That is capitalism. What is your beef? That you are poor? With so little reasoning skills and education in the sciences, you can hardly expect to be rich. Nor does the relative income matter as long as ALL levels of society share equally (in proportion) in the costs and benefits.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30146 Oct 16, 2013
Sunny wrote:
<quoted text>"Yikes"Kyle you're just a want to be scientist and also a little brat boy that thinks nobody can deny his little dream world.
Or maybe you're a pizzed off Android that just thinks he has to control everybody.....lol
Or maybe you been taking to many of them testosterone pills.
Because you're one little mean boy,oh gee I just got it your a short guy.HAHAHAHA
Concession accepted! LMAO
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30147 Oct 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Welcome to the thread, "Poly"!! You'll see a lot of warmist religious freaks here. When posed with actual observations and facts, they always play the 'condescend' card.
pssssst......no intellectual honesty either. Some even perpetuate lies that have been proven wrong time and again.(1)
(1) See Spaced Blues willful dishonest claims.
You're so predictable. You quote him stating a transparently fallacious argument that I just showed to he fallacious for the slow witted. You then belittle science and rationalists while ignoring and all but endorsing that argument. If you had any intellectual honesty, you would have corrected him and told him not to use fallacious arguments. After all, that damages the denial industry's cause.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30148 Oct 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>WARNING!!!!!! Facts are met with ad hominem diatribes on this thread.
Like that one about the black hole that surely is affecting our climate, right?(Snicker)
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30149 Oct 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Good post, Kyle!!! Just replace "denier" (which most of us aren't) with "warmist".....and you might be onto something, son!!!
OK, ftard, tell us how the fact that CO2 increases caused by warming events with other causation makes warming caused by CO2 "impossible".

Small children can see that this is a nonsense argument, so may we assume that it's beyond your comprehension?
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30150 Oct 16, 2013
The Abstruse Polymath wrote:
<quoted text>
Cool story bro.
Everything you think you know is wrong.
http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/cl...
That's nice. Now explain how CO2 released by warming means warming caused by releasing CO2 is impossible. Just dyin' to see you diagram that logic
(face -> palm)
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30151 Oct 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>I think you're on the right track.....but I bet he puts the "T" ointment under his arms.
Got logic? Defend the indefensible or concede it. Or continue to tap dance and hand wave; it reveals the dishonesty of science deniers quote well.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30152 Oct 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe because their claims aren't rational when compared to actual observations?? You clowns keep insisting predictions precede reality!!! LOL
Are you always stuck in stupid, son?
We obviously know what you want to believe.....but christ, son.....how long does reality have to keep bytch slappin ya???
Nice rant. Makes your pathological inability to acknowledge your fellow nutter's laughable, fallacious argument more glaring. Thanks.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30153 Oct 16, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>WARNING!!! Telling "Kyle" he is wrong is inviting a verbal lashing from a poster with sociopathic issues.
It's about "Kyle". Wish he wasn't Kyle.....I think he's a woman with HPD. At least the behavior matches a couple crazy bytches I new a couple decades ago.
You do know that ad homs while refusing to acknowledge a patently stupid argument does nothing but hurt your credibility. Or would do so in theory if you had any.
Kyle

Columbia City, IN

#30154 Oct 16, 2013
The Abstruse Polymath wrote:
<quoted text>
I know.
It's as challenging as boxing a quadriplegic sometimes.
Then diagramming your logic should be a trivial task.

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
Drop one word....add one word game (Apr '14) 1 hr Mutant-cucumber 690
CNN = Fake News 2 hr Davycrockett 20
Liberals caught planning violence for inauguration 5 hr Space ace 23
Wikileaks: dossier "bogus" 5 hr Space ace 19
Flaming Liberal on ACA healthcare 14 hr Merry Moosmas 1
John Lewis is NOT a civil rights hero! He's a c... 14 hr Zephyrus 3
South Carolina ALS Association Thanks To: Rev. ... 14 hr R Kieth 4

Minneapolis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Minneapolis Mortgages