AGWCult finally self destructs

[jc456]

So interesting in the study of human minds is it that 'belief' in a scientific phenomena is ALSO an issue that happens down partisan lines.

Oh what a coinkidink

Yeah, they can't show us in a lab how 120PPM of additional can warm air, now they have a bigger problem because they're claiming that the CO2, that can't warm air, is warming a far greater volume of water that takes far more energy to warm!

You just have to have faith that the data manipulators are telling us the truth

I think its clear that any data manipulating is you goofballs not understanding or even wanting to understand how science works.

Further....i think you even know that.

GT, manipulating data to fit a failed theory is the opposite of how science works.

If the data doesn't fit the Theory, the theory has to go.

unless you need money, then the opposite is true.

 

[imawhosure]

So interesting in the study of human minds is it that 'belief' in a scientific phenomena is ALSO an issue that happens down partisan lines.

Oh what a coinkidink

Yeah, they can't show us in a lab how 120PPM of additional can warm air, now they have a bigger problem because they're claiming that the CO2, that can't warm air, is warming a far greater volume of water that takes far more energy to warm!

You just have to have faith that the data manipulators are telling us the truth

hey Frank, I concluded after several discussions lately about the CO2 in the oceans, the manipulation likely occurring is the adding of heat due to back radiation temperatures. In one of the posts over the weekend, one of the lefties stated something about using a spectrometer and reading back radiation. Seems logical since that is there biggest belief is that added back radiation is heating the water right?

Who cares what they say, seriously. If their experts can't get it right (read my last post) why should we believe that these armchair experts have a clue!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listen to Michio Kaku on Relativity, he said that even after 100 years of rigorous testing, if Relativity fails on even one data set it must be discarded as a Theory. Why isn't that same true of AGW?

 

[G.T.]

So interesting in the study of human minds is it that 'belief' in a scientific phenomena is ALSO an issue that happens down partisan lines.

Oh what a coinkidink

Yeah, they can't show us in a lab how 120PPM of additional can warm air, now they have a bigger problem because they're claiming that the CO2, that can't warm air, is warming a far greater volume of water that takes far more energy to warm!

You just have to have faith that the data manipulators are telling us the truth

I think its clear that any data manipulating is you goofballs not understanding or even wanting to understand how science works.

Further....i think you even know that.

youre wrong. The explanation is sound, and makes sense.

Whereas YOU, in a very UNscientific way, opposed the theory BEFORE you studied.

You have self admitted this, and are still even studying, and dont have a lick of the background the community has which HAS reached a consensus.

If you deny you have an agenda while knowing full well inside your fucking soul you were going to "deny" it no matter what before you even looked into it.....then you're not a very well adjusted individual.

Even you have to see that writing on that wall - YOU are acting out an agenda...


And of course venturing off onto the internet one could justify anything they set their hearts to.

Point is, your heart was set.

Point is, to believe the number of people who would have had to have been paid off are in some sort of conspiratorial collusion.......is a mental condition.

GT, manipulating data to fit a failed theory is the opposite of how science works.

If the data doesn't fit the Theory, the theory has to go.

 

[G.T.]

Listen to Michio Kaku on Relativity, he said that even after 100 years of rigorous testing, if Relativity fails on even one data set it must be discarded as a Theory. Why isn't that same true of AGW?

Toi bad for him, relativity is verified all around him on a daily basis. Of course, he is not daft to that and was simply being philosophical.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listen to Michio Kaku on Relativity, he said that even after 100 years of rigorous testing, if Relativity fails on even one data set it must be discarded as a Theory. Why isn't that same true of AGW?

Toi bad for him, relativity is verified all around him on a daily basis. Of course, he is not daft to that and was simply being philosophical.

But he was talking about the scientific method where nothing is ever "Settled science"

 

[G.T.]

Listen to Michio Kaku on Relativity, he said that even after 100 years of rigorous testing, if Relativity fails on even one data set it must be discarded as a Theory. Why isn't that same true of AGW?

Toi bad for him, relativity is verified all around him on a daily basis. Of course, he is not daft to that and was simply being philosophical.

But he was talking about the scientific method where nothing is ever "Settled science"

So youre reduced to these feeble attempts at cheeseball points like this?

Humans not being able to survive a trip to the sun is "settled science," too dude. So because of your 'what if' and the verbiage of the scientific method nothing is settled ever again and forevermore then?

Thats such baby boy banter its gross.

 

[jc456]

So interesting in the study of human minds is it that 'belief' in a scientific phenomena is ALSO an issue that happens down partisan lines.

Oh what a coinkidink

Yeah, they can't show us in a lab how 120PPM of additional can warm air, now they have a bigger problem because they're claiming that the CO2, that can't warm air, is warming a far greater volume of water that takes far more energy to warm!

You just have to have faith that the data manipulators are telling us the truth

hey Frank, I concluded after several discussions lately about the CO2 in the oceans, the manipulation likely occurring is the adding of heat due to back radiation temperatures. In one of the posts over the weekend, one of the lefties stated something about using a spectrometer and reading back radiation. Seems logical since that is there biggest belief is that added back radiation is heating the water right?

Who cares what they say, seriously. If their experts can't get it right (read my last post) why should we believe that these armchair experts have a clue!

dude, I don't. I take my daily beating in here because I know more than the experts. You know, those money hungry scientists who know nothing about what science actually is?

 

[jc456]

Listen to Michio Kaku on Relativity, he said that even after 100 years of rigorous testing, if Relativity fails on even one data set it must be discarded as a Theory. Why isn't that same true of AGW?

Toi bad for him, relativity is verified all around him on a daily basis. Of course, he is not daft to that and was simply being philosophical.

But he was talking about the scientific method where nothing is ever "Settled science"

So youre reduced to these feeble attempts at cheeseball points like this?

Humans not being able to survive a trip to the sun is "settled science," too dude. So because of your 'what if' and the verbiage of the scientific method nothing is settled ever again and forevermore then?

Thats such baby boy banter its gross.

and yet, with all this mumbo jumbo you spout, you have no solution to your problem do you?

 

[SSDD]

It tells me to go with the consensus of the experts in the field because all else is likely, and you're right, driven by money and propaganda. I'll go with science for 1000 Alex

The "consensus" has a long history of being almost always wrong....and making a lot of money in the process. Shallow thinking is such a tragedy when information is so readily available.

 

[SillyWabbit]

The hardcore denier trolls here keep getting more hysterical.

That makes people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

So more people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

And the vicious cycle continues. They refuse to believe the world is laughing at them because they're acting like crazy people. In their conspiracy-addled minds, it must be because of a vast secret global socialist plot directed against them.

One could write very interesting papers documenting the abnormal psychology of deniers. Oh wait, that's already been done, by Lewandowski and Cook. Naturally, deniers declared that was also part of the conspiracy against them. In the world of a hardcore conspiracy cultist, every piece of evidence automatically supports their conspiracy theory somehow.

Anyways, this thread should be in the conspiracy folder, along with many denier threads.

Well, if global warming is real, and doom is just over the horizon, then feel free to say "I told you so." I'm sure there will be great solace to taken in knowing you were right in the face of the demise of human life sustaining environment. Also, somebody needs to tell China and India about all this stuff, because I don't think they're fully onboard with this environmental responsibility nonsense. I think they'd sooner poison the entire planet straight to hell rather than curb growth.

I could be wrong...

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The hardcore denier trolls here keep getting more hysterical.

That makes people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

So more people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

And the vicious cycle continues. They refuse to believe the world is laughing at them because they're acting like crazy people. In their conspiracy-addled minds, it must be because of a vast secret global socialist plot directed against them.

One could write very interesting papers documenting the abnormal psychology of deniers. Oh wait, that's already been done, by Lewandowski and Cook. Naturally, deniers declared that was also part of the conspiracy against them. In the world of a hardcore conspiracy cultist, every piece of evidence automatically supports their conspiracy theory somehow.

Anyways, this thread should be in the conspiracy folder, along with many denier threads.

Manboob, the hardcore cultist false prophet of AGW doom imagines that if he claims the "deniers" are cultists" or whatever, then the truth of their position will somehow get marginalized.

It won't.

No matter what manboob pretends, the facts are that science is never validly governed by some alleged "consensus."

Actual science simply does not support the AGW Faithers' claims that mankind is causing climate change and disaster. Therefore, the AGW Faithers resort to bullshit proxy methodologies, falsification of data* and non-scientific propositions that are inherently non-falsifiable -- as though THEIR claptrap somehow manages to qualify as "science."

It doesn't.

_______________________
* Speaking of SHAMEFUL, manboob evidently endorses THIS kind of bullshit in support of his proclamations of the FAITH:
Mind-Blowing Temperature Fraud At NOAA Real Science

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The hardcore denier trolls here keep getting more hysterical.

That makes people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

So more people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

And the vicious cycle continues. They refuse to believe the world is laughing at them because they're acting like crazy people. In their conspiracy-addled minds, it must be because of a vast secret global socialist plot directed against them.

One could write very interesting papers documenting the abnormal psychology of deniers. Oh wait, that's already been done, by Lewandowski and Cook. Naturally, deniers declared that was also part of the conspiracy against them. In the world of a hardcore conspiracy cultist, every piece of evidence automatically supports their conspiracy theory somehow.

Anyways, this thread should be in the conspiracy folder, along with many denier threads.

And how is Kyoto working out for you ?

 

[ScienceRocks]

This country is circling the crapper. Most people aren't serious or down right child like.

 

[westwall]

So interesting in the study of human minds is it that 'belief' in a scientific phenomena is ALSO an issue that happens down partisan lines.

Oh what a coinkidink

Yeah, they can't show us in a lab how 120PPM of additional can warm air, now they have a bigger problem because they're claiming that the CO2, that can't warm air, is warming a far greater volume of water that takes far more energy to warm!

You just have to have faith that the data manipulators are telling us the truth

I think its clear that any data manipulating is you goofballs not understanding or even wanting to understand how science works.

Further....i think you even know that.

I am a PhD geologist so you're wrong on all counts. The problem is the AGW supporters abandoned the scientific method over a decade ago. What is one of the foundational aspects of the SM? Repeatability. That means you, as a scientist are REQUIRED to hand over your data and methods to anyone so they can check your work.

Care to guess who refuses to do that?




University of East Anglia rejects lost climate data claims Environment The Guardian

 

[G.T.]

So interesting in the study of human minds is it that 'belief' in a scientific phenomena is ALSO an issue that happens down partisan lines.

Oh what a coinkidink

Yeah, they can't show us in a lab how 120PPM of additional can warm air, now they have a bigger problem because they're claiming that the CO2, that can't warm air, is warming a far greater volume of water that takes far more energy to warm!

You just have to have faith that the data manipulators are telling us the truth

I think its clear that any data manipulating is you goofballs not understanding or even wanting to understand how science works.

Further....i think you even know that.

I am a PhD geologist so you're wrong on all counts. The problem is the AGW supporters abandoned the scientific method over a decade ago. What is one of the foundational aspects of the SM? Repeatability. That means you, as a scientist are REQUIRED to hand over your data and methods to anyone so they can check your work.

Care to guess who refuses to do that?




University of East Anglia rejects lost climate data claims Environment The Guardian

So youre a geologist and should respect the edication it takes to.become proficient within a given scientific field and should be giggling at internet lames thinking they're privy to that education, minus the work.

 

[Crick]

And I'm the King of Siam.

Thousands of scientists in published, peer reviewed work have clearly demonstrated the validity of AGW. Your side has demonstrated NOTHING.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The hardcore denier trolls here keep getting more hysterical.

That makes people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

So more people stop paying attention to them.

So they get more hysterical.

And the vicious cycle continues. They refuse to believe the world is laughing at them because they're acting like crazy people. In their conspiracy-addled minds, it must be because of a vast secret global socialist plot directed against them.

One could write very interesting papers documenting the abnormal psychology of deniers. Oh wait, that's already been done, by Lewandowski and Cook. Naturally, deniers declared that was also part of the conspiracy against them. In the world of a hardcore conspiracy cultist, every piece of evidence automatically supports their conspiracy theory somehow.

Anyways, this thread should be in the conspiracy folder, along with many denier threads.

Well, if global warming is real, and doom is just over the horizon, then feel free to say "I told you so." I'm sure there will be great solace to taken in knowing you were right in the face of the demise of human life sustaining environment. Also, somebody needs to tell China and India about all this stuff, because I don't think they're fully onboard with this environmental responsibility nonsense. I think they'd sooner poison the entire planet straight to hell rather than curb growth.

I could be wrong...

china is building 20gw per year of solar and wind each!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And I'm the King of Siam.

Thousands of scientists in published, peer reviewed work have clearly demonstrated the validity of AGW. Your side has demonstrated NOTHING.

Hey Crickster, remember that bullshit chart you always post as a way of avoiding posting a real experiment linking a wisp of CO2 to temperature? Guess what? You now have to generate at least 4 times the energy (or 700 times according to you or 3,000 according to Mamooth)

You're so screwed!

 

[westwall]

So interesting in the study of human minds is it that 'belief' in a scientific phenomena is ALSO an issue that happens down partisan lines.

Oh what a coinkidink

Yeah, they can't show us in a lab how 120PPM of additional can warm air, now they have a bigger problem because they're claiming that the CO2, that can't warm air, is warming a far greater volume of water that takes far more energy to warm!

You just have to have faith that the data manipulators are telling us the truth

I think its clear that any data manipulating is you goofballs not understanding or even wanting to understand how science works.

Further....i think you even know that.

I am a PhD geologist so you're wrong on all counts. The problem is the AGW supporters abandoned the scientific method over a decade ago. What is one of the foundational aspects of the SM? Repeatability. That means you, as a scientist are REQUIRED to hand over your data and methods to anyone so they can check your work.

Care to guess who refuses to do that?




University of East Anglia rejects lost climate data claims Environment The Guardian

So youre a geologist and should respect the edication it takes to.become proficient within a given scientific field and should be giggling at internet lames thinking they're privy to that education, minus the work.

I respect good science and despise politicized science. Any who argues from "consensus" is not talking about science. They are talking about politics. Science is about facts. If I tell you that the speed of light is 186,282.396 miles per second. That's what it IS. It doesn't matter who you are talking to the speed of light is a fact.

When one talks about climatology you are talking about a subjective as opposed to an objective science. A good comparison is found in sport. Look at a hard science (also known as an EXACT science), such as geology, or physics, or chemistry, as track and field. The only thing that matters is the order of finish.

Now imagine climatology which is a soft science (also called an INEXACT science) as gymnastics. In gymnastics the winners are whoever made the judges happier. It is subjective, it is OPINION. It is not however a hard or exact science.

That's the difference.