Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-02-2018, 06:42 AM
 
10,800 posts, read 3,607,088 times
Reputation: 5951

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"Is this man a scientist ?"

Is Al Gore a scientist?

Otherwise this is a thread fail and his opinion is meaningless should be applied to EVERYTHING he has said about the subject.

Why was his movie showed in public schools?

If the same criteria had been applied we would NOT have so many supporting "global warming"

Explain WHY have the liberals CHANGED from "global warming" to "Climate change"?



Please advise us when this supposedly happened? You know, that actual time frame.

https://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...-a7837881.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-02-2018, 06:48 AM
 
19,731 posts, read 10,162,676 times
Reputation: 13097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. In-Between View Post
First Rule of Holes: when you're in a hole, stop digging. You just doubled down on the "I dunno jack-**** about science or how it works" card.

Please give us an example of "all the times" that scientists fake results.
Read the first post where I mentioned it. I listed several examples, starting with tobacco.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 06:51 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,299,963 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad View Post
Except actual temperature measurements over the past two decades confirm the original trend that was predicted.
An independent assessment of Mann's hockey stick was conducted by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (Wahl 2007). They reconstructed temperatures employing a variety of statistical techniques (with and without principal components analysis). Their results found slightly different temperatures in the early 15th Century. However, they confirmed the principal results of the original hockey stick - that the warming trend and temperatures over the last few decades are unprecedented over at least the last 600 years.

NOTE: The BLACK are actual measurements.

Source
Let's argue for a second that is true. That doesn't address my point. Is that how science is supposed to be done?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 06:51 AM
 
19,731 posts, read 10,162,676 times
Reputation: 13097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
You left out the money factor. Scientists have been paid to come up with certain conclusions. Look at early research into smoking. Those scientists were paid to come to the conclusion that smoking was not harmful. The original research into artificial sweeteners was flawed, but backed up by other scientists. The first research on saccharine said that it caused cancer. Turned out that rats were being fed the equivalent of a human drinking gallons of straight saccharine daily. When they got normal amounts, there was no cancer increase. Several climate scientists have said that they were offered money(grants) to back man-made global warming. Drugs are turned out every year that are dangerous because company-owned scientists are paid to fake or ignore results.
You can go back a few hundred years, the churches pressured scientists to agree with their beliefs.
Here is my original post with a few examples of scientists lying. Guess you can't comprehend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 06:53 AM
 
Location: Morrison, CO
34,257 posts, read 18,634,981 times
Reputation: 25834
Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad View Post
Maybe you should.

Quote:
A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...er-than-losses
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 07:30 AM
 
10,800 posts, read 3,607,088 times
Reputation: 5951
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Let's argue for a second that is true. That doesn't address my point. Is that how science is supposed to be done?
It confirms what was predicted using science to make those predictions, and science to substantiate the predictions two decades later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 07:36 AM
 
10,800 posts, read 3,607,088 times
Reputation: 5951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilot1 View Post
Try something much more current, like February of 2018, this year:

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2686/n...sharper-focus/

This one from last year, still more current that your link:

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard...-at-both-poles
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 07:39 AM
 
9,254 posts, read 3,598,442 times
Reputation: 4852
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
Here is my original post with a few examples of scientists lying. Guess you can't comprehend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 07:45 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,299,963 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad View Post
It confirms what was predicted using science to make those predictions, and science to substantiate the predictions two decades later.
Fine, don't address the question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2018, 08:22 AM
 
19,731 posts, read 10,162,676 times
Reputation: 13097
TEPlimey, you post proves my point. Scientists lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top