Global Warming is over.

[gwb72tii]

Most of what you know is a matter of belief and agreement. Little or none is based on personal experience and discovery. A big part of growing up in any society is in fact, process of learning to accept what everybody around you "knows" is so.
Most of what you know is a matter of believing what you've been told. Understand that nothing there's wrong with you in that respect.
(We both have no clue on what we are taking about)

thanks for the moral support
the AGW faithful will never, despite physical evidence, change their beliefs and faith. science has nothing to do with it. if it did, nando, cale and other believers would have changed their views by now.
instead, EVERY FUCKING THING IN THE WORLD can be explained away by that evil evil anthropogenic CO2.
they want peer reviewed science, yet when given the same its dismissed outright.
ROFL

[cale]

(We both have no clue on what we are taking about)

Speak for yourself. It's safe to say, thanks mostly to your bold display of your lack of knowledge, that I have a healthy advantage over you of my understanding of this science and Q5 blows pretty much everyone out of the water. I've chosen to educate myself with work from those who specialize in this field, and there's next to no disagreement amongst them..hence my current position. This also ties into my next reply, feel free to keep reading!

science has nothing to do with it. if it did, nando, cale and other believers would have changed their views by now.

You enjoy making baseless accusations don't you? I invite you to go to past threads and see where I was a year or two ago on this subject. I was swaying more towards AGW, but I was skeptical to some degree. I voiced my lack of absolute belief in AGW, do not try to argue otherwise.

I became more knowledgeable, I read about the subject. I made an effort to learn more and adopted my current position. I adapated to what the evidence supported, that AGW is factual. That's what science does, it dismisses what is found to be wrong and moves forward.

So, care to make any more inaccurate assumptions to revolve an argument around?

[nando]

thanks for the moral support
the AGW faithful will never, despite physical evidence, change their beliefs and faith. science has nothing to do with it. if it did, nando, cale and other believers would have changed their views by now.
instead, EVERY FUCKING THING IN THE WORLD can be explained away by that evil evil anthropogenic CO2.
they want peer reviewed science, yet when given the same its dismissed outright.
ROFL

1 paper of questonable sources vs thousands of others that say otherwise is your evidence?

weak.

[gwb72tii]

Speak for yourself. It's safe to say, thanks mostly to your bold display of your lack of knowledge, that I have a healthy advantage over you of my understanding of this science and Q5 blows pretty much everyone out of the water. I've chosen to educate myself with work from those who specialize in this field, and there's next to no disagreement amongst them..hence my current position. This also ties into my next reply, feel free to keep reading!



You enjoy making baseless accusations don't you? I invite you to go to past threads and see where I was a year or two ago on this subject. I was swaying more towards AGW, but I was skeptical to some degree. I voiced my lack of absolute belief in AGW, do not try to argue otherwise.

I became more knowledgeable, I read about the subject. I made an effort to learn more and adopted my current position. I adapated to what the evidence supported, that AGW is factual. That's what science does, it dismisses what is found to be wrong and moves forward.

So, care to make any more inaccurate assumptions to revolve an argument around?

as i said, no phsical data would be enough to the faithful
lack of warming for 14 years, peer review science, lack of consensus, none of it will suffice for the faithful.
science by consensus is in-and-of-itself an oxymoron, yet the belief still exists.
keep the faith

[nando]

except your no warming claim is simply untrue.

[cale]

as i said, no phsical data would be enough to the faithful
lack of warming for 14 years, peer review science, lack of consensus, none of it will suffice for the faithful.
science by consensus is in-and-of-itself an oxymoron, yet the belief still exists.
keep the faith

Recycling day is usually on Wednesday, but it seems to every day when you visit this thread.

[BraveUlysses]

Pretty sure you mean verbal diarrhea day

[salvuhdor]

Wow. Welp
Please let me know when you intellectual fellas who are educated and know more about everything than everybody else find a cure for cancer.

[herbivor]

Wow. Welp
Please let me know when you intellectual fellas who are educated and know more about everything than everybody else find a cure for cancer.

They're working on it rather than giving up or choosing to believe cancer doesn't exists.

[salvuhdor]

They're working on it rather than giving up or choosing to believe cancer doesn't exists.

Sweet good to know since cancer sucks.

[BraveUlysses]

Wow. Welp
Please let me know when you intellectual fellas who are educated and know more about everything than everybody else find a cure for cancer.

How about you start working on not being a terrible poster?

[salvuhdor]

How about you start working on not being a terrible poster?

Okay got it. Thanks!

[gwb72tii]

the politics of the left thru global warming

and you question why anybody could possibly be a skeptic

quotes
IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer, speaking in November 2010, advised that: “…one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth…”

Kevin Trenberth, a lead author of 2001 and 2007 IPCC report chapters, writing in a 2007 “Predictions of Climate” blog appearing in the science journal Nature.com, admitted: “None of the models used by the IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed state”.

In 1988, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, told editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald: “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”


http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...their-science/

[nando]

yet another article by a guy with a book to sell.

Architecture professor and columnist Larry Bell has a new book of climate science disinformation out, Climate of Corruption.

he's an architecture professor and columnist. wow. another new low for you.

[herbivor]

he's an architecture professor and columnist. wow. another new low for you.

Serious question George, why do you put faith in an architecture professor over a climate scientist actively publishing and studying climate change? Find us one, just one climate scientist actively publishing that thinks AGW is a big scam and agrees with your position. That's all we are asking for. Once you can find those kind of skeptics with the data to back it up, then we can have a serious debate. Until then, you are just a parrot for right wing propaganda. Nothing you bring to the table is of a reputable source. Not a thing.