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.
You didn't contest the information, you simply waved it off without proper support for your position. Then you wonder why you were on ignore and why your position is such a joke?
Contest the information please. Did you answer to the problems with your reports claims on the science? Nope.
Did you comment on any of science? Nope.
All you did was respond with fallacies.
1. Why is it misinformation? You need to provide quantifiable examples of the science. Is the information presented wrong? Why?
2. What about the "facts" is partisan? You need to provide quantifiable examples. Is there biased support that omits, adjusts, or manipulates facts to push the bias? What are they?
Please talk about the science, I could care less about your opinions about who or who is not qualified. We are talking about the science, not stupid politics. Unless... that is all you understand?
What about Watts study on the surface stations is wrong? How many stations does the NDSC report? How many are in a CRN of 3 or more?
Can you discuss anything more than simply calling names and waving off information? Can you?
hilarious from one who still has not responded to the science pointed out to him. I told you its a waste of my time. I discredited your sources. No need to comment anymore than that. You could care less about who is not qualified??? Thats your quote. You might want to care when your sources are not qualified. Its kind of important.
Again my position is not my position but the position of the majority of th scientific community.
And your ability to comment past using derogatory remarks is that of a kindergarten level. Can you please answer to anything?
You claim you are so informed, but I have NEVER seen you talk about the science directly? Please tell me you are not simply an idiot pawn posting links. Can you please discuss the science, or is cheap insults all you have? Are you simply a troll? I can cut and past the last 40 responses in this style of topic and most of it will be the level of a teenage loud mouth who hasn't figured out they have no idea what they are talking about. Put up, or shut up.
you are just simply a liar point blank. I have posted scientific support on many threads and as usual you ignore them and then try to call me a liar. Your tactics are weaker than your effort to support deniers. You are such a tough guy. try reading the responses with the science like the ones you never respond to
As far as scientist goes a PSU inquiry board has concluded that further investigation into Michale Mann the inventor of the hockey stick is warranted based on the leaked CRU documents.
Quite a week in the Climate Change arena, expect things to continue to accelerate. Revelations such as citing a environmentalist magazines and student dissertations for the peer reviewed IPCC reports and issues associated with the Chinese data which underpins the conclusion that urban heat sinks have no effect has found to be falsified. Let the snowball roll.... many of things are coming out as direct result of the email hack as people delve further into them and start connecting the dots.
In a humorous side note while all this is going down Pachauri,a railroad engineer, no Climatology credentials, with significant financial interests in climate change AND who just happens to be head of the IPCC has released a book that has been deemed softcore porn that tells the tale of aging climate scientist and his sexual adventures across the globe....
LOL as if his credibility needed that boost.... ROFL.
Ladies and Gentleman I present Dr. Pachauri, railroad engineer, climate change entrepreneur, softcore pron novelist ...............and......... <drum roll>..... Chairman of the IPCC or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change if you prefer.
wow an investigation into one of your 4 arguments. Note the area stating it will not in anyway evaluate the science of climate change.
Create a crisis, to get us away from the middle east dependence. Bobby Kennedy started the oil crisis. Look what he did and his middle eastern policy!!!
Global warming, is just another created crisis that has no merit, other than to control the people.
hilarious from one who still has not responded to the science pointed out to him. I told you its a waste of my time. I discredited your sources. No need to comment anymore than that. You could care less about who is not qualified??? Thats your quote. You might want to care when your sources are not qualified. Its kind of important.
Again my position is not my position but the position of the majority of th scientific community.
You are all over the place. Simply cutting and pasting news stories and talking point sites is not a response to the specific information we were discussing.
I asked you specifically what is wrong with Anthony Watts and his surface station assessments.
Can you not respond to it directly or are you so ignorant of the topic that all you know how to do it Google talking point sites and news clippings?
Your ignorance is astounding and again, you look like a joke. Answer to the content of the questions. Put up or shut up.
you are just simply a liar point blank. I have posted scientific support on many threads and as usual you ignore them and then try to call me a liar. Your tactics are weaker than your effort to support deniers. You are such a tough guy. try reading the responses with the science like the ones you never respond to
I responded to one of the claims in the post generally in a past post. You ignored my response like you always do. Again, respond to the content of the post. Put up or shut up. You are making yourself look like ignorant.
If you can't discuss the details of the points you bring up, you have no business discussing them in the first place.
You are all over the place. Simply cutting and pasting news stories and talking point sites is not a response to the specific information we were discussing.
I asked you specifically what is wrong with Anthony Watts and his surface station assessments.
Can you not respond to it directly or are you so ignorant of the topic that all you know how to do it Google talking point sites and news clippings?
Your ignorance is astounding and again, you look like a joke. Answer to the content of the questions. Put up or shut up.
whats wrong with watts???? they guy is a blogger weather man who sells the instruments he talk about being bad... Slight conflict of interest
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.
.
