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.
I still find it hilarious that at EVERY POINT prior to evidence of hiding that climate change data came to light conservatives FLATLY IGNORED every aspect of scientific data saying global warming was real.
Now, when a single peice of data agrees with them, all of a sudden scientific research is credible to conservatives again!
The liberals were stupid and wrong to hide this, but the conservatives make themselves look more and more hypocritical by embracing and running with this so hard.
When the data is for global warming = Conservatives dont trust science data
When its against global warming = Conservatives LOVE and tout science data
Hypocrisy.
Actually, they contested the claims being made. Why? because... it didn't add up. Read the Wegman report concerning Mann's MBH98. Read the various issues now.
Your argument is dubious at best and yet again... another attempt to avoid discussion of the "science" you so dearly claim supports you while you personally attack with speculative claims.
I have numerous posts concerning the data in many of these threads. Feel free to comment concerning the science. You have yet to anyway, and I am pretty confident if I were to check your history and post a list of your comments, it would be just like the fallacious comment above.
Shall I? Shall we show people your history of comment in this subject so they can see your "knowledge" and positions on the issue? Maybe I can put up Dreamers too?
Nobody wants to respond to the above post concerning the code? Any comments? Ideas? Anything?
Does the published data that uses that code indicate that there was a value adjusted linear interpolation assumption used in the analysis? What data was this applied to? Is this in reference to a factor that is well established via observation?
I'm clueless regarding the annotation used by the experts in climate research. From the context of the code it seems that the data set would probably better been analyzed using PCA not the interpolation.
Actually, they contested the claims being made. Why? because... it didn't add up. Read the Wegman report concerning Mann's MBH98. Read the various issues now.
It didnt add up? Unless you work at NASA, 'adding up' in the face of given scientific data amounts to nothing more than 'opinion'.
Are you trying to claim Conservatives Opinion > Science Data + Everyone elses Opinion?
Quote:
Shall I? Shall we show people your history of comment in this subject so they can see your "knowledge" and positions on the issue? Maybe I can put up Dreamers too?
This is my 3rd, maybe 4th post on global warming. Ive maybe referenced it 10 or less times in the over-200 posts Ive made here.
What 'history' do I have on the subject that you speak of, or did you want to make up any other arguments from me to debate, or strawman yourself out further?
Feel free to generalize me however you wish, though. It seems thats your only method of argument, aside from strawman and ad hominem.
It didnt add up? Unless you work at NASA, 'adding up' in the face of given scientific data amounts to nothing more than 'opinion'.
I'll be honest even if you work at NASA the ability to make the math go your way when analyzing large data sets or doing predictive modeling often amounts to results that are pretty biased.
Ok that is the last deflection from you. You go off to the ignore list as it is obvious you are playing the role of a partisan hack.
your full of it anyway...you say that but then respond to people who you claim to ignore. Your threat is as legit as the crap you try to push all over the forum 24 hours a day.....do you sleep?
I still find it hilarious that at EVERY POINT prior to evidence of hiding that climate change data came to light conservatives FLATLY IGNORED every aspect of scientific data saying global warming was real.
Now, when a single peice of data agrees with them, all of a sudden scientific research is credible to conservatives again!
The liberals were stupid and wrong to hide this, but the conservatives make themselves look more and more hypocritical by embracing and running with this so hard.
When the data is for global warming = Conservatives dont trust science data
When its against global warming = Conservatives LOVE and tout science data
Hypocrisy.
the data is still for global warming with the exception of some questionable emails. The science has not changed. Please don't feed into the political spin they put on this. GW is not about politics.
All he has done is deflect and attack fallaciously. I have yet to seem him answer to any evidence yet and I have directly contested his information a couple times already, even asked him to go back and respond. Pathetic it is.
you mean the way you ignored a 113 page report throughout an entire thread even though asked about it numerous times
Actually, they contested the claims being made. Why? because... it didn't add up. Read the Wegman report concerning Mann's MBH98. Read the various issues now.
Your argument is dubious at best and yet again... another attempt to avoid discussion of the "science" you so dearly claim supports you while you personally attack with speculative claims.
I have numerous posts concerning the data in many of these threads. Feel free to comment concerning the science. You have yet to anyway, and I am pretty confident if I were to check your history and post a list of your comments, it would be just like the fallacious comment above.
Shall I? Shall we show people your history of comment in this subject so they can see your "knowledge" and positions on the issue? Maybe I can put up Dreamers too?
Like has been said before......you think your infomation is the only right information around, you know everything there is to know about sciene but yet all you do is post here while the real world continues to look at the big picture. The obvious picture.
Here is an idea. Look up pictures of the polar ices caps, of greenland, of glacier national park. from 20 years ago and today. Explain that. Look up ocean levels. Explain that. Look at endless accounts of warmer global temperatures. Explain that. Look at polar bears. Look at islands in the south pacific. Now consider the science and the amount of greenhouse gases put into the atmosphere since the Industrial revolution. All the un natural occurences. Now since you know so much about science explain how mass increase in greenhouse gases has zero impact on the planet. wait you don't even need science, just common sense. I or any rational human being could tell you that your air qualit and atmosphere would certainly be affected. would you run a car in your house? manufacture steel in your house? how about burning solid waste? Would you?
So if you would not why do you pretend it does nothing on the bigger scale?
you mean the way you ignored a 113 page report throughout an entire thread even though asked about it numerous times
Tell me you're not talking about the newest product from the AGW fanatics? The one that goes into great detail about the pending doom and gloom on the planet?
Did you bother to check some of the authors?
You will find the same cast of characters who wrote that report are knee-deep in the climategate scandal.
Tell me you're not talking about the newest product from the AGW fanatics? The one that goes into great detail about the pending doom and gloom on the planet?
Did you bother to check some of the authors?
You will find the same cast of characters who wrote that report are knee-deep in the climategate scandal.
wow a new answer........what a surprise
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.
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.
