Who still takes global warming seriou...

Who still takes global warming seriously?

There are 30932 comments on the Farmington Daily Times story from Jan 28, 2010, titled Who still takes global warming seriously?. In it, Farmington Daily Times reports that:

Despite the recent discovery of the e-mails that resulted in "Climate Gate" and the fact this has been one of the coldest and harshest winters in many years, Gov.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Farmington Daily Times.

SpaceBlues

United States

#30509 Oct 19, 2012
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
But I know all the slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pigisms that "steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling" has rooted in, all these years.
Good that your piles(hemorrhoiks for pigs) are causing you difficulties.
You do possess extrasensory perceptions!

Amazing observations to me.
SpaceBlues

United States

#30510 Oct 19, 2012
Who still takes global warming seriously? The people who care.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#30511 Oct 19, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
NobodyYouEverWantToKnow, aka:
<quoted text>It's high time you took something seriously, Mr Undoubtably Spelt Fourty, none of your following comments can be taken seriously.
Forty is spelt with a U
Etymology is not a serious subject
Deforestations is a consequence of AGW
Epistemologists compile dictionaries
Epystemologists compile dictionaries
Samuel Johnson was an American
Ice calving is restricted by size
Spelt is only an ancient grain
The equator doesn't have "season"
There isn't a 'right or wrong' way of spelling
Cars can be charged with road collisions
Vikings didn't know how to live in a warmer Greenland
How much heat you are transferring at one time has NO relationship to the temperature of any objects
Alberta is a country
New Moore island is in the MOUTH of the several rivers
Insects and plants don't qualify as species
Enercon install offshore wind generators
Scientific laws are not science
Climate and weather are not 'linked'
Predictions are for astrologers
Ethanol is a very workable and effective solution
AGW is just the warming of the global average surface temperature due to GHGs
AGW is the global average
The science says that human emissions are responsible for MOST of AGW, which has SOME unknown but significant part of climate change
The IPCC report of 2001 and 2007 clearly show that GHGs are by far the largest contributor but not the exclusive contributor to AGW
America has two political parties
Climate and weather are not 'linked'
'nondenier' is a real word
Fruiting plants are especially chosen by bees for, "polination"
We acted on CFCs in the 70s
CO2 is not vital for life on planet Earth
CO2 causes, "thermal pollution"
The Alps are only in Europe
CO2 is a 'thermal pollutant'
CO2 levels are rising faster than the temperature can react
AGW is comparable to the Holocaust
Please show this 'ararmist club' and membership list
And theory is the endpoint of science
The 'unproven' stuff is 'hypothesis'
The fact that all the scientific authorities confirm AGW as theory means that it IS science fact as defined
There are no 'laws of science'
Scientific laws are NOT science
the science isn't going to change
While the science doesn't change rapidly it does change
And nowhere is there 'skepticism' of the science
Experiment is NOT science
Experiment can only give you data. it cannot PROVE anything
Your list is only about 20 to 30% complete.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#30512 Oct 19, 2012
factologist wrote:
Your list is only about 20 to 30% complete.
I have the rest on file, but most of it can be found here:
What is the most STUPID post made by an AGW'er.....I nominate LessHypeMoreFact
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#30513 Oct 19, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>I have the rest on file, but most of it can be found here:
What is the most STUPID post made by an AGW'er.....I nominate LessHypeMoreFact
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
He is pretty good at it, I know.
My favorite is the post were he "explains" CO2 as an IR absorber but only at low temps.
But then there is also the one were he "explains" climate follows the Nyquist rule.
There are so many to pick from.
Yeah, he's a good candidate, alright.
PHD

Houston, TX

#30514 Oct 19, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>I have the rest on file, but most of it can be found here:
What is the most STUPID post made by an AGW'er.....I nominate LessHypeMoreFact
You should nominte your----self.The most stupid post made by you is useless babbel tainted with hate covered with spam cut and paste hot air. Go ahead give your----self a pat on the point above your shoulders you deserve it.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#30515 Oct 19, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>I have the rest on file, but most of it can be found here:
What is the most STUPID post made by an AGW'er.....I nominate LessHypeMoreFact
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
Of course his bit on plant emitting CO2 was a classic as well.
litesong

Everett, WA

#30516 Oct 19, 2012
steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling wrote:
It's high time you took something seriously....
Its been a lowlife time for 'steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling', since he never took his slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pigisms seriously.
litesong

Everett, WA

#30517 Oct 19, 2012
steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling wrote:
....doesn't take kindly to being corrected.
"steenking piddling diddling middling mudling mudslinger dirtling" isn't kindly dealing in his incorrect slimy steenking filthy vile reprobate rooting(& rotting) racist pukey proud pigisms.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#30518 Oct 19, 2012
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>My favorite is the post were he "explains" CO2 as an IR absorber but only at low temps.
non-fact. In fact a lie. Show any reference where I said that. You obviously cannot read plain English (like Earthling) and 'revisede' it to your own fancy.
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>
But then there is also the one were he "explains" climate follows the Nyquist rule.
The Nyquist rule can be applied to any evenly sample signal. It has nothing to do with the 'climate following' the rule.

These are red herrings to take advantage of my ignoring your posts. Well, since I am directly challenged, I will respond here. You get no 'freebies' to your trolling.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#30519 Oct 19, 2012
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course his bit on plant emitting CO2 was a classic as well.
When they decay or during the night sure. What is your point? That you cannot understand the biology of plants? You don't understand ANYTHING so that is not an exception.
litesong

Everett, WA

#30520 Oct 19, 2012
litesong wrote:
Good that your(dirtling's) piles(hemorrhoiks for pigs) are causing you difficulties.
/////////
SpaceBlues wrote:
You do possess extrasensory perceptions!
Amazing observations to me.
//////////
litesong wrote:
Thank you for the compliment. However, hemorrhoiks are supposed to be spelled hemorrhoinks.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#30521 Oct 19, 2012
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
non-fact. In fact a lie. Show any reference where I said that. You obviously cannot read plain English (like Earthling) and 'revisede' it to your own fancy.
My sincere apology. It was Steve Chase's post, not yours, that had the screwy concept of CO2 absorption. I do seem to get you two mixed up. Are you two related?
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#30522 Oct 19, 2012
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>I have the rest on file, but most of it can be found here:
What is the most STUPID post made by an AGW'er.....I nominate LessHypeMoreFact
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
After careful consideration and a slap on the butt from LHMF for attributing a post to him that was actually made by Steve Chase, I nominate Steve Chase for the most stupid AGW'er post(s)/poster ever made.
But,I nominate LHMF as a close runner up.

Tina receives my nom for the most stupid poster who is currently posting, period. AGW'er or Denier.(Of course not including Trolls like Litesong and PHD. I don't consider them "stupid posters", they simply post stupid Troll things, frequently ).

I just don't like Trolls. Don't you feel that way?
PHD

Houston, TX

#30523 Oct 19, 2012
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>After careful consideration and a slap on the butt from LHMF for attributing a post to him that was actually made by Steve Chase, I nominate Steve Chase for the most stupid AGW'er post(s)/poster ever made.
But,I nominate LHMF as a close runner up.
Tina receives my nom for the most stupid poster who is currently posting, period. AGW'er or Denier.(Of course not including Trolls like Litesong and PHD. I don't consider them "stupid posters", they simply post stupid Troll things, frequently ).
I just don't like Trolls. Don't you feel that way?
So you must have a hate for your----self.
factologist

Huntsville, AL

#30524 Oct 19, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>So you must have a hate for your----self.
There is a difference, PHD, between countering a post with opinions and following someone around just to write disrespectful things, the way you and litesong do. Obviously, it's your right to do so, I just don't happen to like it. Further, I believe it is beneath you both, as you both seem informed about the subject.
I do admit that every now and then I will act the Troll and, yes, I don't like myself when I do.

Than you for reminding me.
litesong

Everett, WA

#30525 Oct 19, 2012
litesong wrote:
Arctic sea ice extent is above the 2007 sea ice extent & is above the average minimum for the 2000's, at 5,798,750 km2 (October 16, 2012), this day's sea ice leap, the size of S. Dakota! The sun has been unseen from the North Pole for 4 weeks, temperatures above the 80th parallel lower than the last two weeks of dates for 2007 & other recent years, & temperatures on landforms surrounding the Arctic Ocean as low as -20 degC.
Arctic Ocean warmth is & will continue to keep Arctic sea ice thinner through the coming winter & even spring. As of October 2, Arctic sea ice VOLUME is ~23% lower than any satellite recorded year AND indications of submarine-detected Arctic sea ice yearly VOLUME.
Yes, the Arctic sea ice VOLUME is disappearing, year to year, quicker than the Arctic sea ice extent.
//////////
litesong continues:
Presently, Arctic sea ice extent is above the 2007 sea ice extent for yesterday's date & is above the average minimum Arctic sea ice extent for the 2000's, at 6,072,656 km2 (October 18, 2012), the last two days' slowing rate, increasing at an Arkansas area per day. However, present Arctic sea ice area is similar to 2007 Arctic sea ice area. Temperatures above the 80th parallel average minus 17 degC, the past week's plus of temperatures below the same week of 2007 & other recent years. Present temperatures on landforms surrounding the Arctic Ocean, are way below freezing, a broad swath of Siberia into the minus double digits, as low as -20 degC.
Arctic Ice Pack is much closer to the Russian islands, Franz Joseph Land & Svalbard, beginning to encircle the islands. Sea ice connected to the islands is strongly developing around the islands(connecting one set of Russian islands to the mainland). Arctic Ice Pack is extending far south into the vast clear waters north of Alaska & Siberia. While waiting for Arctic Ice Pack to connect with islands, huge sea ice floes strongly developed in the vast clear waters north of Siberia(due to broad double digit minus Siberian temps flooding into Arctic waters & vortex mixing breaking down stratified solar heated waters?) AND connected the Ice Pack to far eastern Siberia, truly a remarkable development!

A detail noted 9 days ago is a raggy taggy developing edge along a part of the semi-circle, possibly NOT coincidental with the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS (plus?) OF SQUARE KILOMETERS, of waters north of Alaska & Siberia that are VASTLY CLEAR. Might the raggy taggy edge indicate huge turbulence & currents in this largest(ever?) ice free, & resulting southerly-directed heat stratified Arctic waters? I wonder if there might develop more raggy taggy edging, enough to form a swirl pattern? Such a vast swirl at such a huge scale would be impossible...... wouldn't it?
Eight days ago, noted near the raggy taggy ice pack, have developed 3 tiny pixel ice floes(arced?), separated from the Arctic ice pack toward southerly directions. Seven days ago, the number of ice floes increased to 8 & indeed they formed an ARC. Pretty sure they represent a large scale vortex in open Arctic water! Further data, show that the vortex is true!

The west end of the Northwest Passage is ice blocked & filled, altho the east end is fairly ice free.
Downwellings in unusual clear Arctic waters, normally sea ice covered in decades past, can be transporting only tattered traces of extra solar energy to continental shelf, Arctic Ocean & sea depths, since the sun will be fully set 24 hours a day, tomorrow north of the 80th parallel. Southern Arctic waters get only a skimming from the sun for a few hours a day, which is only double digit degrees off the horizon, at most!
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#30526 Oct 19, 2012
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>My sincere apology. It was Steve Chase's post, not yours, that had the screwy concept of CO2 absorption. I do seem to get you two mixed up. Are you two related?
What on earth are you babbling about now and who said it?

If you actually post a link to a thread I will continue the point until you either understand it, or show yourself incapable of reasoning. Your move.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#30527 Oct 20, 2012
factologist wrote:
After careful consideration and a slap on the butt from LHMF for attributing a post to him that was actually made by Steve Chase, I nominate Steve Chase for the most stupid AGW'er post(s)/poster ever made.
Nobody on Topix posts under that name, Steve Case would be the nearest, but he's a staunch sceptic, either you're confused, or wrong, because LessFact is the undefeated king of stupid AGW posts.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#30528 Oct 20, 2012
LessFactMoreHype, aka:
NobodyYouEverWantToKnow wrote:
That CO2 cannot be a 'pollutant'? Wrong. Anything CAN and IS a pollutant in a specific context. In this case, as a greenhouse gas causing 'thermal pollution' of the planet.
-
The point is really that the whole claim of 'CO2 is vital to life' and 'CO2 is plant food' promoted by Earthling is not so much that it is technically wrong, but that it is IRRELEVANT to the issue of CO2 as a 'thermal pollutant'. Agreed?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

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.

Global Warming Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Climate change implicated in France floods 9 min Fair Game 3
What role do you think humans play in global wa... (Sep '14) 43 min IB DaMann 9,794
News Former astronaut scoffs at global warming (Feb '09) 2 hr Into The Night 2,377
Terrible News: The Greenland Ice Sheet is Growing 2 hr Into The Night 55
Poll Will it, won't it? Part 3 (Aug '12) 2 hr Into The Night 3,153
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr Into The Night 60,022
Global Cooling (Apr '15) 5 hr Earthling-1 1,568
More from around the web