Chef Jim Posted December 15, 2015 Posted December 15, 2015 Gees, settle down and take your own advice sparky You just told someone to !@#$ off and you're telling me to settle down. Dude, you're off the rails today.
3rdnlng Posted December 16, 2015 Posted December 16, 2015 Okay. You're officially unhinged and out of anything resembling even the simplest thought. Put the keyboard away and take a nap. Hey, only his mommy is allowed to tell him to take a nap.
Tiberius Posted December 16, 2015 Posted December 16, 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/16/opinion/paris-climate-accord-is-a-big-big-deal.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 Thomas Friedman's op-ed almost makes it sound like we Liberals are winning the climate change debate! On Paris: That is a big, big deal. Many leaders had a hand in it, but it would not have happened without the diplomacy of President Obama and John Kerry. On the bad people: The only important holdout in the world to this deal is the U.S. Republican Party. I wouldn’t care about such cave men — as one sign borne by a Paris demonstrator said, “Dinosaurs didn’t believe in climate change either,” and it didn’t end well for them — except that one of these knuckleheads could be our next president and mess this up. On change for the good: “In the last six years,” said Hal Harvey, C.E.O. of Energy Innovation, a policy research group, “solar prices have dropped by more than 80 percent, and now cost less than a new coal plant. Wind is down 60 percent, and LED lights more than 90 percent.” With other new technologies near at hand “it becomes clear that a clean future costs no more than a dirty one,” he said. “Texas now has the most wind installed of any U.S. state. Texas!” On a personal note: I changed all the light bulbs in my house from the "old" spiral ones that were already pretty low wattage to new LED lights that are super low wattage. An 8 watt bulb now lights up with as much brightness as an old 40 watt bulb. Guess I won't worry about Republicans in Congress who have the Tea Party knuckle dragging after them: The $1.1 trillion spending bill, which covers all federal agencies and is expected to pass the House and Senate this week, bars the Department of Energy from spending money to enforce federal rules that set tougher efficiency standards for light bulbs. Such a measure has been attached to prior budget deals as well. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/01/14/coal-projects-light-bulb-rules/4476103/ Continue reading the main story You just told someone to !@#$ off and you're telling me to settle down. Dude, you're off the rails today. And I'm now calling you stupid, stupid. But that doesn't mean I'm angry, stupid. Get a grip
Chef Jim Posted December 16, 2015 Posted December 16, 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/16/opinion/paris-climate-accord-is-a-big-big-deal.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 And I'm now calling you stupid, stupid. But that doesn't mean I'm angry, stupid. Get a grip Oh the irony. You tell someone that you disagree with to !@#$ off and you tell ME to get a grip. Damn the Holiday stress is gettin' to ya. Couple more weeks and it's a new year!
Deranged Rhino Posted December 16, 2015 Posted December 16, 2015 And I'm now calling you stupid, stupid. But that doesn't mean I'm angry, stupid. Get a grip
B-Man Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Site, Cite, and OversightDecember 19, 2015 Anthony Watts has finally produced his long-awaited study showing that moving temperature gauges next to steam pipes, air conditioners, and asphalt — get this — changes the temperature trends. As Anthony points out, there hasn’t been much serious criticism, and AGW proponents seem to be the only theorists in the world who spend vastly more time and energy defending poor methodologies than coming up with better ones. It’s frankly comical that a team of unpaid volunteer skeptics had to do the real fieldwork of actually looking at the stations, something the tens of billions spent on climate science annually apparently couldn’t cover. Propitious timing, as NOAA and environmental activists are desperately trying to avoid complying with Congressional oversight into whether politics is driving ever-higher surface data adjustments. This particular farce has gone beyond mere confirmation bias and entered the realm of Lysenkoism. Do they really not understand that billions of tax dollars come with certain legal strings attached? “Shut up and go away” is not an acceptable response to a Congressional subpoena. The taxpayers paid for the scientists as well as the nonscientists whose government records they deigned to release. No oversight? Fine, no funding. Shut NOAA down until they comply. Good luck in the private sector, folks. One further hopes these savages either fully comply or end up in jail for obstruction, as their behavior is horribly corrosive to scientific integrity, the spirit of free inquiry, the principles of objectivity and reproducibility, and the rule of law. More at the link............
Tiberius Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Site, Cite, and Oversight December 19, 2015 Anthony Watts has finally produced his long-awaited study showing that moving temperature gauges next to steam pipes, air conditioners, and asphalt — get this — changes the temperature trends. As Anthony points out, there hasn’t been much serious criticism, and AGW proponents seem to be the only theorists in the world who spend vastly more time and energy defending poor methodologies than coming up with better ones. It’s frankly comical that a team of unpaid volunteer skeptics had to do the real fieldwork of actually looking at the stations, something the tens of billions spent on climate science annually apparently couldn’t cover. Propitious timing, as NOAA and environmental activists are desperately trying to avoid complying with Congressional oversight into whether politics is driving ever-higher surface data adjustments. This particular farce has gone beyond mere confirmation bias and entered the realm of Lysenkoism. Do they really not understand that billions of tax dollars come with certain legal strings attached? “Shut up and go away” is not an acceptable response to a Congressional subpoena. The taxpayers paid for the scientists as well as the nonscientists whose government records they deigned to release. No oversight? Fine, no funding. Shut NOAA down until they comply. Good luck in the private sector, folks. One further hopes these savages either fully comply or end up in jail for obstruction, as their behavior is horribly corrosive to scientific integrity, the spirit of free inquiry, the principles of objectivity and reproducibility, and the rule of law. More at the link............ Carbon still traps heat in the atmosphere though, right?
OCinBuffalo Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) BTW is that the royal we or are you a colony creature - and Tom you know you didn't get that information off the NOAA website, you read it somewhere (and you hope they got it from NOAA) but you forgot where so now you are acting like a little crying B word when I ask you nicely to link. No. I can vouch for DC_Tom's use of "we" here. That is because I too have had to spoon feed you data, concepts, links, and probably ~20 credits worth of a business degree.... ...because you either know nothing, or less than nothing(meaning you "know" things that are flat wrong), about so many things. You do know some basic things: like how to use Youtube. But, as an example, you don't know anything about Keynesian economics. You appear to support it, but, no one can say for sure, because you are incapable of expressing yourself, directly due to your own ignorance of the material. So, yeah WE have to spoon feed YOU all the time. And, in this instance, what the hell difference would giving you a link make? Are you going to read it? Are you going to understand it? No and no. No, all you're doing is trying to force somebody to do work, and waste their time...so that you can ignore/marginalize their work, "move on", and hope that nobody notices. I mean, it's a great troll...but please...you aren't capable of it. If you were, you'd have gotten Tom to collate all that data. He laughed at you instead. Screw that, and you. We're not here to be your personal internet researchers, or your personal tutors. EDIT: The same goes for gatorman. Edited December 21, 2015 by OCinBuffalo
Tiberius Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 No. I can vouch for DC_Tom's use of "we" here. That is because I too have had to spoon feed you data, concepts, links, and probably ~20 credits worth of a business degree.... ...because you either know nothing, or less than nothing(meaning you "know" things that are flat wrong), about so many things. You do know some basic things: like how to use Youtube. But, as an example, you don't know anything about Keynesian economics. You appear to support it, but, no one can say for sure, because you are incapable of expressing yourself, directly due to your own ignorance of the material. So, yeah WE have to spoon feed YOU all the time. And, in this instance, what the hell difference would giving you a link make? Are you going to read it? Are you going to understand it? No and no. No, all you're doing is trying to force somebody to do work, and waste their time...so that you can ignore/marginalize their work, "move on", and hope that nobody notices. I mean, it's a great troll...but please...you aren't capable of it. If you were, you'd have gotten Tom to collate all that data. He laughed at you instead. Screw that, and you. We're not here to be your personal internet researchers, or your personal tutors. EDIT: The same goes for gatorman. Hey! That isn't necessary!
B-Man Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 “How Not to Debate Nuclear Energy and Climate Change”: Baby Survives Parents’ Global Warming Suicide Pact Francisco Lotero, 56, and Miriam Coletti, 23, shot their daughter and her toddler brother before killing themselves. Their son Francisco, two, died instantly after being hit in the back. However, their unnamed daughter cheated death after the bullet from her father’s handgun missed her vital organs. . . Her parents said they feared the effects of global warming in a suicide note discovered by police. They must not have got the memo that the planet was just saved by the Paris conference. On the other hand, maybe we shouldn’t be too hasty in judging the parents. Perhaps they’re just ahead of the curve. Given that the climatistas’ energy agenda involves economic suicide, perhaps they were just trying to get a head start, leading by example. In which case we should salute their far-sightedness.
OCinBuffalo Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Hey! That isn't necessary! Yes it is. If you actually read/comprehended merely 25% of the material that's been offered to you over the time you've been here, your views would necessarily have changed. Specifically, knowing more that you knew yesterday would change anyone's perspective, no matter what....unless they are purposely trying to remain ignorant. The fact is all of the time spent on you/...lybob here has changed nothing. You don't understand why Tom is saying what he is about agreements vs. treaties, because you still don't understand the Constitution. No matter how many times "WE" have explained one facet of it, or large sections of it, you clearly don't know it. That is a choice. Stupidity is a choice. Ignorance is not. You're no longer ignorant, as we've informed you of all sorts of things over and over again. Yet, you're still an idiot, and the only way that happens, given all the time expended on improving your knowledge base, is purposeful behavior/choosing stupidity.
DC Tom Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Yes it is. No, it's not. That which is understood need not be discussed.
/dev/null Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 “How Not to Debate Nuclear Energy and Climate Change”: Baby Survives Parents’ Global Warming Suicide Pact Francisco Lotero, 56, and Miriam Coletti, 23, shot their daughter and her toddler brother before killing themselves. Their son Francisco, two, died instantly after being hit in the back. However, their unnamed daughter cheated death after the bullet from her father’s handgun missed her vital organs. . . Her parents said they feared the effects of global warming in a suicide note discovered by police. They must not have got the memo that the planet was just saved by the Paris conference. On the other hand, maybe we shouldn’t be too hasty in judging the parents. Perhaps they’re just ahead of the curve. Given that the climatistas’ energy agenda involves economic suicide, perhaps they were just trying to get a head start, leading by example. In which case we should salute their far-sightedness. But they used a gun, which makes them evil
OCinBuffalo Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 “How Not to Debate Nuclear Energy and Climate Change”: Baby Survives Parents’ Global Warming Suicide Pact Francisco Lotero, 56, and Miriam Coletti, 23, shot their daughter and her toddler brother before killing themselves. Their son Francisco, two, died instantly after being hit in the back. However, their unnamed daughter cheated death after the bullet from her father’s handgun missed her vital organs. . . Her parents said they feared the effects of global warming in a suicide note discovered by police. They must not have got the memo that the planet was just saved by the Paris conference. On the other hand, maybe we shouldn’t be too hasty in judging the parents. Perhaps they’re just ahead of the curve. Given that the climatistas’ energy agenda involves economic suicide, perhaps they were just trying to get a head start, leading by example. In which case we should salute their far-sightedness. First: the guy who wrote your first link is a laughable. He doesn't understand that in condemning the lady who attacked the four men, he's exposing the very tactics he'd be fine with if they were on the right. So, it's public "shaming" bad, when it's being done to your heroes. (shaming is hilarious, because it also exposes the narcissism of these people...as though nobody ever considers the source of the "shaming", becuase everybody loves and admires the shamer, because....) But of course, public shaming good, when it's done to the right. It's like the concept of hypocrisy is completely lost on the man. As I said: laughable. Beyond the fact that this guy takes himself and his cohorts for more seriously than is deserved, it's that they have so little self-awareness, that they'd probably never understand what I am saying here. That is hilarious. Good one. Second: Well, from a purely objective standpoint? Good. 2 less idiots in the world. Bad. The toddler was never given the choice of whether to be an idiot or not, and that is disgusting. Hope. Perhaps the baby grows up and spends her life fighting against everything her parents were, and everything they stood for. Perhaps her story wakes up a few idiots like the guy above, so that they realize they are actually part of a cult. Perhaps she helps to de-program some of these cultists? I suppose that's the only good ending to this God-awful mess, but even this ain't to great. Notice how I am only blaming the parents, not all Global Warming clowns everywhere? Which is what they'd do, if the same thing was done by people for traditional marriage, or ending abortion. Notice also how we don't hear anything about gun control? Where are the gun-control people? I mean, if there ever was a clear cut case for them, killing toddlers and babies with guns? Are we going to have Obama come out and give us a speech about gun control based on this story? Yeah, right. No, it's not. That which is understood need not be discussed. But...it isn't understood. It may be understood by you, but, the world doesn't turn on your understanding alone. Other people have to catch up, and sometimes, as terrible as it is, you have to let them. I know it sucks. Believe me, I know. But sucking doesn't make it not true.
Tiberius Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 Yes it is. If you actually read/comprehended merely 25% of the material that's been offered to you over the time you've been here, your views would necessarily have changed. Specifically, knowing more that you knew yesterday would change anyone's perspective, no matter what....unless they are purposely trying to remain ignorant. The fact is all of the time spent on you/...lybob here has changed nothing. You don't understand why Tom is saying what he is about agreements vs. treaties, because you still don't understand the Constitution. No matter how many times "WE" have explained one facet of it, or large sections of it, you clearly don't know it. That is a choice. Stupidity is a choice. Ignorance is not. You're no longer ignorant, as we've informed you of all sorts of things over and over again. Yet, you're still an idiot, and the only way that happens, given all the time expended on improving your knowledge base, is purposeful behavior/choosing stupidity. Most of the material you clowns post is simply propaganda, so its a positive good I don't "learn" from you, rabbit hole Tom, or any of the other creeps that post right wing garbage
....lybob Posted December 22, 2015 Posted December 22, 2015 Yes it is. If you actually read/comprehended merely 25% of the material that's been offered to you over the time you've been here, your views would necessarily have changed. Specifically, knowing more that you knew yesterday would change anyone's perspective, no matter what....unless they are purposely trying to remain ignorant. The fact is all of the time spent on you/...lybob here has changed nothing. You don't understand why Tom is saying what he is about agreements vs. treaties, because you still don't understand the Constitution. No matter how many times "WE" have explained one facet of it, or large sections of it, you clearly don't know it. That is a choice. Stupidity is a choice. Ignorance is not. You're no longer ignorant, as we've informed you of all sorts of things over and over again. Yet, you're still an idiot, and the only way that happens, given all the time expended on improving your knowledge base, is purposeful behavior/choosing stupidity. Tony you're full of baloney
DC Tom Posted December 22, 2015 Posted December 22, 2015 Most of the material you clowns post is simply propaganda, so its a positive good I don't "learn" from you, rabbit hole Tom, or any of the other creeps that post right wing garbage Yeah, NOAA data sets are right-wing propaganda.
Deranged Rhino Posted December 22, 2015 Posted December 22, 2015 Most of the material you clowns post is simply propaganda, so its a positive good I don't "learn" from you, rabbit hole Tom, or any of the other creeps that post right wing garbage And what you post is what? The truth? Like the time you KNEW no Europeans owned guns today or ever. Remember that? That was funny.
B-Man Posted December 24, 2015 Posted December 24, 2015 You have to love the (consistent) media............... Christmas Eve was warmer in 1955. “Three fourths of the country was over 60 degrees, and Ashland Kansas, Geary Oklahoma and Encinal Texas were all over 90 degrees. Fort Lauderdale was 85 degrees. All of the stations below were over 60 degrees on Christmas Eve, 1955.” Plus: “Last winter, the East Coast had record cold. That was ignored because it was ‘less than 1% of the Earth.’ But this week, the Eastern US defines the global climate.” It’s all about the narrative. .
Recommended Posts