Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

The simple fact that you linked to an article as authoritative that describes science as "right" or "wrong" demonstrates how ignorant you truly are.

Oh man. Where before I feared you hadn't even read the articles, now it is clear you attempted to read them and just didn't understand them. That's even more disappointing. Keep on thinking you know better than the experts though, that's definitely not a classic case of foolishness or anything.

 

You don't know what that word means, do you?

You posted a different article than the one I was responding to, and you managed to misinterpret that one too. Then instead of responding to my follow up you decided to make a snarky one-liner. Critical thinking indeed.

  • Replies 7.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Oh come on the Fabius Maximus BS? You really think I've never seen that before? Climate skeptics (read: scientifically illiterate people) pull from the same 5 or so sources every time.

 

Luckily the study's own author refutes the blog post's misinterpretation of the data:

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/01/rick-santorum/santorum-cites-flawed-climate-change-figure-and-mi/

 

Please don't just say "oh Politifact is a liberal propaganda machine." Read the article. The blog post deliberately misinterprets the study.

 

 

No you nitwit, this is the article that you laid out in response to my post.

Posted (edited)

This is the article you posted and the one I initially responded to. I posted that Politifact article and this one from the author himself:

 

https://ourchangingclimate.wordpress.com/2014/08/11/survey-confirms-scientific-consensus-on-human-caused-global-warming/

 

Here is the actual Survey, how about using this thing we called critical thinking?

Summary for Policymakers of the IPCCs AR5 Working Group]

Then you posted this article which isn't the same one. Initially I was confused but I saw you had pulled the graphs from the original article so I went back to that one.

 

I don't think you have your sources straight. And again - the graphs you posted show that climate scientists are confident in man-made climate change. I am not sure how you are interpreting them in a way that you see something different.

Edited by HappyDays
Posted

The simple fact that you linked to an article as authoritative that describes science as "right" or "wrong" demonstrates how ignorant you truly are.

Yup. But he keeps digging.

 

Science is verifiable, not the domain of "experts" who work in secrecy and do "science magic" that mere muggles cannot comprehend or replicate.

Posted

I bet you have one of those I'm Part of the Solution, Not Part of the Problem bumper stickers :rolleyes:

Always wanted one of those "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate" bumper stickers. Would probably settle for a T-shirt.

Posted

This is the article you posted and the one I initially responded to. I posted that Politifact article and this one from the author himself:

 

https://ourchangingclimate.wordpress.com/2014/08/11/survey-confirms-scientific-consensus-on-human-caused-global-warming/

 

 

Then you posted this article which isn't the same one. Initially I was confused but I saw you had pulled the graphs from the original article so I went back to that one.

 

I don't think you have your sources straight. And again - the graphs you posted show that climate scientists are confident in man-made climate change. I am not sure how you are interpreting them in a way that you see something different.

 

Thanks for wasting my time.

 

That won't happen again.

Posted

 

Thanks for wasting my time.

 

That won't happen again.

Lol! This is a classic post right here. I don't think you even understood the graphs you posted. For example, your using an "I don't know my confidence level" response as a stand-in for "I am not sure if global warming is manmade." And now you double down on your ignorance and assume I am mistaken. I am sure you can't articulate your thoughts in any kind of intelligent manner because you would have done so by now.

 

Here's a fun idea - find a real climate scientist and bring up your points with them. Once they stop involuntarily laughing I'm sure they'll be happy to address some of your concerns.

Posted

Lol! This is a classic post right here. I don't think you even understood the graphs you posted. For example, your using an "I don't know my confidence level" response as a stand-in for "I am not sure if global warming is manmade." And now you double down on your ignorance and assume I am mistaken. I am sure you can't articulate your thoughts in any kind of intelligent manner because you would have done so by now.

 

Here's a fun idea - find a real climate scientist and bring up your points with them. Once they stop involuntarily laughing I'm sure they'll be happy to address some of your concerns.

Bot time?

Posted

Yup. But he keeps digging.

 

Science is verifiable, not the domain of "experts" who work in secrecy and do "science magic" that mere muggles cannot comprehend or replicate.

 

And repeatable, and falsifiable.

 

And the synonym for "consensus" is "confirmation bias." For example: Millikan's error in his oil-drop experiment, where more accurate repetitions and experiments were discounted because "there was consensus" he was right.

Posted

 

 

 

The U.S. is experiencing rapid climate change, 13 government agencies say in an unreleased report obtained by The New York Times. The report finds with high confidence that temperatures have spiked since 1980 and that how much more the climate will change depends on future emissions and the sensitivity of the climate system to those emissions. The 13 agencies findings contradict the Trump administrations climate stance. Trumps Environmental Protection Agency chief, Scott Pruitt, has stated he does not believe carbon emissions are a primary cause of climate change. Scientists behind the report told the Times that they worried the Trump administration would attempt to suppress the document.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/climate-change-speeding-up-in-us-leaked-government-report-finds

Posted

Do you ever listen to yourself? Are you 4 years old?

14

 

It's gaytortard. He brings it upon himself justly. He should be removed. But he's allowed to stay despite being a formerly banned member several times

Posted

I heard one climate change freak angrily insist that "even if the next 20 years of results of temperature change don't fit our scientific model, it still holds because of all the damage already done!!!" on the radio this morning.

 

There you go....

 

I hope they set a date, like kooks have done for Jesus coming back, and sell their possessions and off themselves by 2022.

Posted

14

 

It's gaytortard. He brings it upon himself justly. He should be removed. But he's allowed to stay despite being a formerly banned member several times

Ok, carry on. Keep saving the world with your "-tard" suffix.

Posted

Earth’s 2016 surface temperatures were the warmest since modern recordkeeping began in 1880, according to independent analyses by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Globally-averaged temperatures in 2016 were 1.78 degrees Fahrenheit (0.99 degrees Celsius) warmer than the mid-20th century mean. This makes 2016 the third year in a row to set a new recored.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-noaa-data-show-2016-warmest-year-on-record-globally

×
×
  • Create New...