Started By
Message
re: Scientists prove climate change will cause heavy rainfall in Britain.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 12:40 am to WheelRoute
Posted on 6/3/14 at 12:40 am to WheelRoute
quote:
So-called "Climategate" was a crock of shite.
No, it wasn't. It showed a group of people manipulating raw data to have a more marketable "product." That's a crock of shite, just not the kind you think it was.
1
Posted on 6/3/14 at 12:42 am to finestfirst79
Let's try this. Try very hard to follow me. You posted a chart on Antarctic sea ice. The vast majority of the ice in the Antarctic is land ice which your chart does not address. The land ice is melting very fast. Do you at least understand this point?
This post was edited on 6/3/14 at 12:45 am
Posted on 6/3/14 at 12:55 am to the808bass
quote:
No, it wasn't. It showed a group of people manipulating raw data to have a more marketable "product." That's a crock of shite, just not the kind you think it was.
Well I guess those emails disprove the theory of global warming. What else you got, science?
BTW, none of the many independent investigations concluded that there was any fraud or scientific misconduct, but toe that line if you must.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 12:56 am to MIZ_COU
quote:
The land ice is projected to be melting very fast with a melting rate somewhat smaller than the margin of error of the studies done.
Better?
Posted on 6/3/14 at 12:58 am to WheelRoute
quote:
BTW, none of the many independent investigations concluded that there was any fraud or scientific misconduct, but toe that line if you must.
So you're not bothered by scientists fudging data for public relations. Oh wait. I bet you're not bothered by people fudging data when you agree with them on some sort of philosophical level. Even better.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 1:09 am to the808bass
quote:
So you're not bothered by scientists fudging data for public relations.
No, I'm not bothered by it. The appropriate bodies reviewed the emails and concluded there wasn't much of a problem, certainly not enough to warrant significant disciplinary action. Several independent organizations reached roughly the same conclusion. I am neither qualified nor driven enough to perform an independent assessment, I'm just going to have to accept the very thorough findings of the people tasked to perform that sort of inquiry. Further, even if I did disagree with the investigations, it still has a negligible impact on the overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming exists. Some data from the CRU may have been compromised? NBD, b/c literally nearly every other scientist has reached roughly the same conclusion w/ their own independent data.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 1:19 am to cas4t
Yo mama's so fat, the heat resulting from the viscous dissipation of energy from the movement of her girth-rolls has created a minor, but measurable, upward temperature excursion that has many of the world's leading climate scientists concerned.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 1:23 am to weedGOKU666
Yo mama's so fat, it has been experimentally shown that her resting cellular respiration rate generates enough body heat to raise the ambient temperature of her county/parish by +2.5 - 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 1:28 am to weedGOKU666
Yo mama's so fat, her required electrolyte intake has noticeably decreased salt concentrations in our world's oceans leading to an increase in the freezing point of arctic waters. This has led to a substantial growth in the arctic ice shelf. You go, fat mama.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 4:15 am to weedGOKU666
Posted on 6/3/14 at 6:09 am to weedGOKU666
Well done sir. Well done.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 8:17 am to Roger Klarvin
You do realize he didn't read the thread, he just said that because he assumed you were taking a conservative stance and I was taking a liberal stance on the global warming issue.
I guess I'm not surprised that you'd slam dunk his comment despite it meaning nothing.
I guess I'm not surprised that you'd slam dunk his comment despite it meaning nothing.
This post was edited on 6/3/14 at 8:17 am
Posted on 6/3/14 at 8:30 am to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
'Living the life', this is not.
Abundance of food, higher consciousness, real connection with the earth and people and animals. Avatarish type reality would be living the life.
This is subjective is it not?
I have no desire to live in a tent and talk to animals or live an avatarish lifestyle.
As you can see ....this is like....your opinion and as condescending as it may seem to others we all have an opinion.
My utopia is one of luxury. I like having a big nice truck. I like being able to load it up with my children and wife and head down to the beach with a couple of jetskis and fishing poles and living my utopia. To each their own.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 8:56 am to Prettyboy Floyd
quote:
This is subjective is it not?
I have no desire to live in a tent and talk to animals or live an avatarish lifestyle.
As you can see ....this is like....your opinion and as condescending as it may seem to others we all have an opinion.
My utopia is one of luxury. I like having a big nice truck. I like being able to load it up with my children and wife and head down to the beach with a couple of jetskis and fishing poles and living my utopia. To each their own.
Living in a tent and talking to animals is taking what I said a little too far, although it's my fault for saying 'avatarish' reality, I should have skipped that.
I'm not against science and technology, I just feel we use it incorrectly most all of the time.
Anyway, that doesn't really matter.
This is a response of mine from earlier that should apply to your comment as well.
quote:
Eddie said why don't we just kill 2/3rds of the population and continue living the life, assuming that continuing to live the life means continuing to live the way we currently live as a society. (Obviously I know he wasn't being serious about killing off overpopulation).
I responded by saying this isn't living the life. As a whole the planet is suffering, which has nothing to do with global warming, we're without a doubt trashing this place. Millions are starving, armed conflict is continuous, our topsoil is being severely degraded, the gap between rich and poor is growing, education is joke, overall we stimulate the worst parts of our human nature. If you disagree with any of that it doesn't really matter, agreeing with all of that isn't really important.
His mentality is sort of like what happened in the most recent financial crisis. We reflaited the bubble instead of fixing the underlying causes, setting up a repeat of the same problem.
What Eddie said is basically saying lets crash then do exactly the same thing that brought us to the point of needing to crash.
The fact that I read a book tonight was just an example of how we as individuals can still enjoy treasures in life despite things being incorrect on the larger scale. I could have said I played a video game, or shot bullfrogs, or whatever. Obviously everyones own way of enjoying their individual life is their version of 'living the life'.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 9:50 am to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
(Obviously I know he wasn't being serious about killing off overpopulation).
I mean I know not everyone would go along with it, but it is certainly a viable solution - I would consider voting yes on it in certain situations.
quote:
What Eddie said is basically saying lets crash then do exactly the same thing that brought us to the point of needing to crash.
Not exactly, after the reset/killing we would have some definite population controls going so we didn't get back into that position. Also we would do shite a little different cause of the increasing technology and have more of a sustainable mindset and research would still continue in green energy etc.
Think of it like playing a video game, you get painted into a corner and you die and go back to the last checkpoint. Except our last checkpoint is a whole lot less people.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 10:38 am to CheeseburgerEddie
quote:Don't worry it will happen. It will just likely take the usual routes of war, civil war, famine, and disease.
I mean I know not everyone would go along with it, but it is certainly a viable solution
Posted on 6/3/14 at 10:43 am to the808bass
quote:
The land ice is projected to be melting very fast with a melting rate somewhat smaller than the margin of error of the studies done.
quote:
Better?
Nope. As a climate scientist you're a stupid piece of shite.
This post was edited on 6/3/14 at 10:46 am
Posted on 6/3/14 at 11:04 am to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
You're kind of a coward, this isn't the first time you've been this spineless.
I think you recognize your own unlikable qualities and use the momentum of the group attack as a way to direct what you dislike about yourself onto me.
I find Klarvin to be one of the more restrained and respectful posters around--I thought he was brilliant in the evolution/theology thread a few nights back.
You're just kind of arrogant, probably not as smart as you think you are, and play these pithy little misdirection games when backed into a corner.
This post was edited on 6/3/14 at 11:14 am
Posted on 6/3/14 at 11:12 am to cas4t
quote:
I'm sure a cop, and whatever vols&shaft does for a living, opinions about climate change should be taken more seriously than a team of scientists.
Research how those scientist's models have performed over the last 25 years (the time when global warming/climate change has been the cash cow is is today) and get back with us.
The cop's opinion is probably going to have been just as accurate. Hell, monkeys flinging poo at a chart on the wall would probably be pretty much as accurate.
Climate change is indeed happening and it has been happening ever since this planet came into existence. The real vanity is that some people think we matter enough in the scheme of things to be able to change or even accurately predict it*
*That isn't to say that we shouldn't be pursuing some of the goals the AGW crowd espouses. We may not can change climate, but we can danged sure dirty up air, water, and soil to the point we cause ourselves very serious problems.
Posted on 6/3/14 at 12:04 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
You do realize he didn't read the thread, he just said that because he assumed you were taking a conservative stance and I was taking a liberal stance on the global warming issue.
I guess I'm not surprised that you'd slam dunk his comment despite it meaning nothing.
You are so wrapped up in yourself that you cant even let an Aggie board inside joke go.
Christ dude
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News