IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags agw , global warming , Polar Ice Caps

Reply
Old 13th December 2008, 03:47 PM   #681
DogB
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,491
BTW - sorry for the brain snap all. I should have waited for all the data before commenting.

In hindsight it was probably inevitable that this sort of thing would happen with a new and complex system like ARGO.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell
DogB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2008, 05:15 PM   #682
TrueSceptic
Master Poster
 
TrueSceptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,143
Originally Posted by DogB View Post
BTW - sorry for the brain snap all. I should have waited for all the data before commenting.

In hindsight it was probably inevitable that this sort of thing would happen with a new and complex system like ARGO.
Above all, be a sceptic. Not a GWSceptic: that's a whole other thing.
TrueSceptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 03:44 PM   #683
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
What on earth is this YIKES? business all about DogB. The fact is I busted him lying outright. Which is no difficult matter given that he is from both realclimate and Goddard.

Get your act together.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 03:50 PM   #684
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
"Above all, be a sceptic. Not a GWSceptic: that's a whole other thing."

Looks like we have a compulsive liar here. But then again. I might be wrong. Now the above implies that you are the one with the evidence right? So no-one else has the evidence but you.

Well thats good news. I've finally found you. The guy with the evidence whose been holding out all this time.

So lets have the evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic warming. Lets have the evidence that a little bit of human-induced warming is a BAD THING during a brutal and pulverizing ice age.

And it would be nice also to have evidence that increasing CO2-levels are a positive rather than a negative feedback if the other two propositions are just a little bit too hard for you.

Fact is this racket is a baseless, transparent, leftist fraud. And skeptics aint what they used to be if they cannot determine that in a very short amount of time.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 03:53 PM   #685
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 25,102
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
What on earth is this YIKES? business all about DogB. The fact is I busted him lying outright. Which is no difficult matter given that he is from both realclimate and Goddard.

Get your act together.
You did what now ?
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 03:59 PM   #686
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 25,102
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
"Above all, be a sceptic. Not a GWSceptic: that's a whole other thing."

Looks like we have a compulsive liar here. But then again. I might be wrong. Now the above implies that you are the one with the evidence right? So no-one else has the evidence but you.
It implies nothing of the sort. Lots of people have the evidence - you can find it for yourself summarised in the IPCC AR4.

Quote:
Well thats good news. I've finally found you. The guy with the evidence whose been holding out all this time.
Sarcasm, I assume.

Quote:
So lets have the evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic warming. Lets have the evidence that a little bit of human-induced warming is a BAD THING during a brutal and pulverizing ice age.
Have I seen this somewhere else? It seems familiar. I could be wrong, of course. It's the "brutal and pulverizing ice age" that rings a bell. (It's been chilly around here recently, but not brutally so.)

Quote:
And it would be nice also to have evidence that increasing CO2-levels are a positive rather than a negative feedback if the other two propositions are just a little bit too hard for you.
That's simply weird. CO2 is a forcing in AGW, which is the subject in hand.

Quote:
Fact is this racket is a baseless, transparent, leftist fraud. And skeptics aint what they used to be if they cannot determine that in a very short amount of time.
Oh, we are what we used to be. And you're pretty transparent.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 04:38 PM   #687
TrueSceptic
Master Poster
 
TrueSceptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,143
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
What on earth is this YIKES? business all about DogB. The fact is I busted him lying outright. Which is no difficult matter given that he is from both realclimate and Goddard.

Get your act together.
Huh? Please explain the above.
TrueSceptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 04:46 PM   #688
TrueSceptic
Master Poster
 
TrueSceptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,143
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
"Above all, be a sceptic. Not a GWSceptic: that's a whole other thing."

Looks like we have a compulsive liar here. But then again. I might be wrong. Now the above implies that you are the one with the evidence right? So no-one else has the evidence but you.

Well thats good news. I've finally found you. The guy with the evidence whose been holding out all this time.

So lets have the evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic warming. Lets have the evidence that a little bit of human-induced warming is a BAD THING during a brutal and pulverizing ice age.

And it would be nice also to have evidence that increasing CO2-levels are a positive rather than a negative feedback if the other two propositions are just a little bit too hard for you.

Fact is this racket is a baseless, transparent, leftist fraud. And skeptics aint what they used to be if they cannot determine that in a very short amount of time.
So, I'm a compulsive liar? Got any evidence?
TrueSceptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 05:02 PM   #689
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 25,102
Originally Posted by TrueSceptic View Post
So, I'm a compulsive liar? Got any evidence?
Perhaps we should just avoid eye-contact ...

(He seems to have a thing about DogB; thinks he's a leftist sock-puppet or something. DogB is OK by me, for a Queenslander.)
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 05:08 PM   #690
TrueSceptic
Master Poster
 
TrueSceptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,143
Originally Posted by CapelDodger View Post
Perhaps we should just avoid eye-contact ...
Oh, I don't know. This could be fun.

Quote:
(He seems to have a thing about DogB; thinks he's a leftist sock-puppet or something. DogB is OK by me, for a Queenslander.)
I'd like to know what that thing is. Again, it could be fun...
TrueSceptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 05:47 PM   #691
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
Right so no evidence.

How did I know in advance?
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 05:49 PM   #692
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
I'll try again.

"So lets have the evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic warming. Lets have the evidence that a little bit of human-induced warming is a BAD THING during a brutal and pulverizing ice age.

And it would be nice also to have evidence that increasing CO2-levels are a positive rather than a negative feedback if the other two propositions are just a little bit too hard for you."

Lets have that evidence GO!!!!!!

And if you don't have it thats my evidence for TrueSkeptic being a compulsive liar right there.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 05:50 PM   #693
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
Its just embarrassing. Look at the infiltration here from total charlatans that would make the spoon-benders of old times embarrassed.

And no in fact the IPCC has no evidence for any of those propositions so that was a lie right there.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 05:53 PM   #694
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
OK Capeldodger.

You want to take it up on TrueSkeptics behalf? But lying and saying that the IPCC has that evidence is not what we wanted. We wanted the actual evidence. Not some sort of lie that the evidence is elsewhere.

You might have thought that lying about the evidence being elsewhere is what we were after.

But I assure you that what we wanted was some actual evidence.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 09:12 PM   #695
DogB
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,491
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
What on earth is this YIKES? business all about DogB. The fact is I busted him lying outright. Which is no difficult matter given that he is from both realclimate and Goddard.

Get your act together.

Yikes means you come across as a total fruitcake, sorry about that but there you go. Not saying you are, just saying that your writing style is a little….intense.


Oh and BTW as I'm certain most people here have already figured out I'm a complete AGW skeptic. My gut tells me the whole thing is a bunch of garbage generated by clever liars in order to generate grant money.

Fortunately I'm also a scientist and that that tells me my gut emotions aren't worth jack. Until I have sufficient personal knowledge to argue cogently from a position of equal familiarity with the subject matter, I have no choice but to accept the dominant hypothesis. I’m working as hard as I can to improve my personal level of understanding but I’ve got a hell of a long way to go.

You do too, you just don’t know it - which IMHO makes you twice as ignorant as me.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell
DogB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 09:19 PM   #696
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
It ought not take you too long to confirm your initial gut reaction.

Just ask them for evidence. They won't come up with it because they don't have it. If you fail to sort it out it will be more a moral and a mental failure then on account of any evidence these guys are coming up with.

Since you are a scientist I can explain their basic model to you and perhaps you will understand. Their fundamental model is entirely otherworldly. And its a flat earth model. Their assumptions are as if we are talking about a flat planet, twice as far from the sun and its noon all the time. There is no liquid water and all the water vapour is in sympathy with earth averages on flatland by some sort of magic. The water vapour is averaged out throughout all of flatland.

Quite literally this is flat earth science. Its not science at all. All their constructs, like their idea of "forcing", are highly processed and fictional notions. Their notion of Lambda is a fudge factor. And on top of that the chain of reasoning leading to their ludicrous calculations is a linear chain where one bad assumption builds directly on top of the one below it. Yet they almost never circle back to basic assumptions.

Last edited by GMB; 16th December 2008 at 09:22 PM.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 09:21 PM   #697
DogB
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,491
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
Since you are a scientist I can explain their basic model to you and perhaps you will understand. Their fundamental model is entirely otherworldly. And its a flat earth model. Their assumptions are as if we are talking about a flat planet, twice as far from the sun and its noon all the time. There is no liquid water and all the water vapour is in sympathy with earth averages but on flatland by some sort of magic. The water vapour is averaged out throughout all of flatland.
I rest my case on the 'yikes' comment.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell
DogB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 09:36 PM   #698
mhaze
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,718
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
....Their fundamental model is entirely otherworldly. And its a flat earth model. Their assumptions are as if we are talking about a flat planet, twice as far from the sun and its noon all the time. There is no liquid water and all the water vapour is in sympathy with earth averages on flatland by some sort of magic. The water vapour is averaged out throughout all of flatland.

Quite literally this is flat earth science. Its not science at all. ....
Well, that's certainly correct of the popular presentations of the radiative balance schemes, as presented by Warmers. The rotating Earth probably bothers them. ...like it might lose it's latest bit of AGW when it rotated to the dark side.

The interaction of the variables locally, summed to global is not equal to the global averages of the variables.
mhaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 10:20 PM   #699
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
Originally Posted by DogB View Post
I rest my case on the 'yikes' comment.

Edited by chillzero:  Edited for civility
. Lets go over it again. What is this YIKES business all about? You just told me that you didn't know anything about it. I just explained how crazy and baseless the basic alarmist model was. And now you are acting the complete idiot with this Yikes business.

Edited by chillzero:  Edited for civility

Last edited by chillzero; 17th December 2008 at 03:07 AM.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th December 2008, 10:22 PM   #700
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
Originally Posted by mhaze View Post
Well, that's certainly correct of the popular presentations of the radiative balance schemes, as presented by Warmers. The rotating Earth probably bothers them. ...like it might lose it's latest bit of AGW when it rotated to the dark side.

The interaction of the variables locally, summed to global is not equal to the global averages of the variables.
Well there you are see? Somebody understands what I'm talking about?
Edited by chillzero:  Edited for civility

Last edited by chillzero; 17th December 2008 at 03:07 AM.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 12:16 AM   #701
DogB
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,491
Edited by chillzero:  Edited for civility


Originally Posted by GMB View Post
Lets go over it again.
Hardly seems worth it. Your comprehension skills aren’t likely to get any better are they?

Originally Posted by GMB View Post
What is this YIKES business all about? You just told me that you didn't know anything about it.
No I explained my knowledge is imperfect. Perhaps I should have used shorter words?

Originally Posted by GMB View Post
I just explained how crazy and baseless the basic alarmist model was.
Exactly, you made an extraordinary claim with no backup. Value = nil.

Edited by chillzero:  Edited for civility
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell

Last edited by chillzero; 17th December 2008 at 03:08 AM. Reason: quoted posts and responses edited
DogB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 12:37 AM   #702
Spud1k
+5 Goatee of Pedantry
 
Spud1k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 844
At the end of a second full-on day of some pretty intense science at the AGU fall meeting, I do a bit of pre bedtime internet in my hotel room and I find this. I think my brain has whiplash.

I would present proof, but the only thing any raving about leftist conspiracies and offhand dismissal of the IPCC findings as 'lies' will ever evoke from me will be 'whatever'. If you have anything to back up your arguments I suggest you present it.

In the meantime, I've got to get my beauty sleep. There's a high-profile presentation tomorrow afternoon.
__________________
"I wouldn't have seen it with my own eyes if I hadn't believed it" - Kevin McAleer

"Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error" - Thomas Jefferson
Spud1k is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 03:09 AM   #703
chillzero
Penultimate Amazing
 
chillzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,526
Mod WarningKeep it civil.
Responding to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By:chillzero
chillzero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 03:17 AM   #704
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
Originally Posted by Spud1k View Post
I would present proof, but the only thing any raving about leftist conspiracies and offhand dismissal of the IPCC findings as 'lies' will ever evoke from me will be 'whatever'. If you have anything to back up your arguments I suggest you present it.

In the meantime, I've got to get my beauty sleep. There's a high-profile presentation tomorrow afternoon.
Don't get ahead of yourself. We are not after PROOF we are after evidence. And no you WOULD NEVER present so much as evidence. Because you don't have any. So do the right thing and get a proper job. And stop this JIVE about claiming you have some evidence. You might better aquit yourself defending homeopathy or tarot reading.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 03:24 AM   #705
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
"Earth's history reveals that climate is sensitive to forcings, imposed perturbations of the planet's energy balance. Human-made forcings now dwarf natural forcings. Despite the climate system's great inertia, climate changes are emerging above the 'noise' of unforced chaotic variability, and greater changes are 'in the pipeline'. "

OH RIGHT? SO WHERE IS ALL THAT MISSING WARMTH HEY? HIDING DOWN THE WELL ALONG WITH THE TWELTH IMAM OF SHIITE NO DOUBT.

"There is a clear and present danger of the climate passing certain 'tipping points',"

NO THERE ISN'T. YOU ARE LYING.

"...climate states where warming in the pipeline and positive feedbacks guarantee large relatively rapid changes with no additional climate forcing.?

"The fact that we are close to dangerous consequences has a bright side: we must reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will minimize many impacts that had begun to seem almost inevitable, including ocean acidification, intensification of regional climate extremes, and fresh water shortages. "

THERE IS NO OCEAN ACIDIFICATION GOING ON THATS RUBBISH AND MINDLESS WORDPLAY AS WELL.

"Actions required to stabilize climate, including prompt phase-out of coal emissions, are defined well enough by our understanding of the climate system, the carbon cycle, and fossil fuel reservoirs. These actions would also yield cleaner air and water, with ancillary benefits for human health, agricultural productivity, and wildlife preservation."

THESE ACTIONS WILL LEAD TO MASS-DEATH JUST AS THE DDT BUREAUCRATISATION CAMPAIGN DID.

You see you don't HAVE any evidence. Its just compulsive lying. Its just one wrong assertion after another. This is the ultimate in big-time spoon-bending. All this talk and no evidence. The UN. A bunch of people who can drink an enourmous amount of cocktails and not get any work done.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 03:47 AM   #706
fsol
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,064
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
"Earth's history reveals that climate is sensitive to forcings, imposed perturbations of the planet's energy balance. Human-made forcings now dwarf natural forcings. Despite the climate system's great inertia, climate changes are emerging above the 'noise' of unforced chaotic variability, and greater changes are 'in the pipeline'. "

OH RIGHT? SO WHERE IS ALL THAT MISSING WARMTH HEY? HIDING DOWN THE WELL ALONG WITH THE TWELTH IMAM OF SHIITE NO DOUBT.

"There is a clear and present danger of the climate passing certain 'tipping points',"

NO THERE ISN'T. YOU ARE LYING.

"...climate states where warming in the pipeline and positive feedbacks guarantee large relatively rapid changes with no additional climate forcing.?

"The fact that we are close to dangerous consequences has a bright side: we must reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will minimize many impacts that had begun to seem almost inevitable, including ocean acidification, intensification of regional climate extremes, and fresh water shortages. "

THERE IS NO OCEAN ACIDIFICATION GOING ON THATS RUBBISH AND MINDLESS WORDPLAY AS WELL.

"Actions required to stabilize climate, including prompt phase-out of coal emissions, are defined well enough by our understanding of the climate system, the carbon cycle, and fossil fuel reservoirs. These actions would also yield cleaner air and water, with ancillary benefits for human health, agricultural productivity, and wildlife preservation."

THESE ACTIONS WILL LEAD TO MASS-DEATH JUST AS THE DDT BUREAUCRATISATION CAMPAIGN DID.

You see you don't HAVE any evidence. Its just compulsive lying. Its just one wrong assertion after another. This is the ultimate in big-time spoon-bending. All this talk and no evidence. The UN. A bunch of people who can drink an enourmous amount of cocktails and not get any work done.

Wow, thank goodness there are people like you in the world to point out all the lies and half truths! If it wasn't for people like you and ,mhaze I might just blindly follow the data and science drawn from it and end up hoodwinked by those darned leftists! Now you have conclusively shown by shouting, name calling and blind assertion this AGW for the leftist conspiracy that it is, I am sure the physics will step right into line behind you. Well done you! Bravo Sir!
fsol is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 03:54 AM   #707
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
So its the argument from facetiousness?

No the fact is the scientific evidence says we will be COOLING. Thats COOLING and not warming. Thats what the science says and thats what you ought to follow.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 04:09 AM   #708
chillzero
Penultimate Amazing
 
chillzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,526
Reminder
Originally Posted by chillzero View Post
Mod WarningKeep it civil.
Responding to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By:chillzero
chillzero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 04:56 AM   #709
TrueSceptic
Master Poster
 
TrueSceptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,143
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
Well there you are see? Somebody understands what I'm talking about?
Edited by chillzero:  Edited for civility
Sure. Mhaze latches onto any GWSceptic here, no matter how idiotic or contradictory their claims. Whether he really agrees with them I can't say, but he can't possibly agree with all of them.
TrueSceptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 05:09 AM   #710
TrueSceptic
Master Poster
 
TrueSceptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,143
Looks like I caused this rude interruption by posting a link to Graeme Bird. He must've found it in a search, or perhaps someone here invited him?
TrueSceptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 06:29 AM   #711
mhaze
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,718
Originally Posted by Spud1k View Post
....I've got to get my beauty sleep. There's a high-profile presentation tomorrow afternoon.
Indeed - take a refreshing break - from the hard science to check out the latest from the Hansen propaganda mill.

Because science, it isn't.
mhaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 07:19 AM   #712
TrueSceptic
Master Poster
 
TrueSceptic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,143
Originally Posted by CapelDodger View Post
Perhaps we should just avoid eye-contact ...

(He seems to have a thing about DogB; thinks he's a leftist sock-puppet or something. DogB is OK by me, for a Queenslander.)
Bird said this on his site
Quote:
Lunatics At RealClimate.Org (Specifically Gavin) Caught Lying.
They’ve headed up a thread-starter calling it:”Ocean Cooling. Not.”

But in fact the oceans are cooling and they are lying.

Whats happened is someones found a problem with these “ARGO FLOATS”.

Argo is some pretty new system for recording oceanic temperatures all over the world and at different depths. And the floats overestimated the amount of cooling between 2003 and 2005. The floats showed that the oceans lost maybe half as many joules as what seemed to be the case originally.

But realclimate.org (****thedata.com) because they are so *********** incompetent and such motivated ********-artists….. used this UNDERESTIMATE-OF-THE-COOLING to launch a counterattack on honest scientists and to mislead people that the oceans aren’t cooling.

Edited by Gaspode:  Edited for Rule 4
and DogB said "Yikes!". DogB is a sceptic but not that sort of "sceptic".

I confess that, due its poor punctuation, I didn't get the meaning of Bird's first post at the time.

Last edited by Gaspode; 20th December 2008 at 04:00 PM. Reason: Quoting
TrueSceptic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 12:32 PM   #713
fsol
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,064
Originally Posted by GMB View Post
So its the argument from facetiousness?

No the fact is the scientific evidence says we will be COOLING. Thats COOLING and not warming. Thats what the science says and thats what you ought to follow.

bzzzt! I'm sorry that's the wrong answer. You get to go home with FAIL.
fsol is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 01:01 PM   #714
GreyICE
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,149
Originally Posted by fsol View Post
bzzzt! I'm sorry that's the wrong answer. You get to go home with FAIL.
I rest my case on troll. Like Jerome and SunniMan (I copy my beliefs from Wikipedia!) this one is mainly going to be annoying if he gets responses. Which he is.

Congrats to all the troll food.
GreyICE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 03:47 PM   #715
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 25,102
Originally Posted by mhaze View Post
Well, that's certainly correct of the popular presentations of the radiative balance schemes, as presented by Warmers. The rotating Earth probably bothers them. ...like it might lose it's latest bit of AGW when it rotated to the dark side.
Oh dear. After all this time you still don't grasp what the greenhouse effect is. It slows down heat loss, by day and night.

Oh, and the Earth does not "rotate to the dark side".

Quote:
The interaction of the variables locally, summed to global is not equal to the global averages of the variables.
How do you sum "The interaction of the variables"? What does that even mean?
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 03:53 PM   #716
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 25,102
Originally Posted by TrueSceptic View Post
Looks like I caused this rude interruption by posting a link to Graeme Bird. He must've found it in a search, or perhaps someone here invited him?
It cerainly appears (from the style) that GMB and this Bird chap are one and the same. I'm sure he appreciates that those who do not share his unique insight might well conclude that he's deranged. If only he'd explain (rather than rant in caps-lock) that could so easily be avoided.

He's got mhaze on-side,of course. mhaze is down with "leftist conspiracy" talk.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 04:31 PM   #717
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
"Troll" is just a commie term. Its a dumb-leftist word. But in any case you guys may have been filibustering so powerfully that you have forgotten what you are trying to avoid finding evidence for.

So let me remind you. We wanted evidence for:

I. The likelihood of catastrophic warming.

II. The idea that a little bit of human-induced warming is a BAD THING during a brutal and pulverizing ice age.

III. Even the very idea that industrial-CO2 can warm the place globally, at sea level, more than a tiny amount.

Filibuster away. But every so often I shall have to come back to this evidence-free-zone in order to remind you just what it is you are filibustering about.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 04:33 PM   #718
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
Originally Posted by fsol View Post
bzzzt! I'm sorry that's the wrong answer. You get to go home with FAIL.
How did you manage to get this one wrong? Pretty simple stuff really. And its not like we will have to wait a long time for our first dose of decisively cold weather.

Last edited by GMB; 17th December 2008 at 06:15 PM.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 06:00 PM   #719
DogB
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,491
Originally Posted by TrueSceptic View Post
....and DogB said "Yikes!". DogB is a sceptic but not that sort of "sceptic".

I confess that, due its poor punctuation, I didn't get the meaning of Bird's first post at the time.

I must confess I didn't even read it all. I read about a third, got to the first rant, saw the all caps and gave up.

Life is too short.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell
DogB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th December 2008, 06:14 PM   #720
GMB
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 535
You are not up to it mate. You couldn't get through it. As much as you might wrinkle that forehead of yours its just a little bit too much.
GMB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:44 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.