Science Humor...Funny Because Sadly,....it is True

[Old Rocks]

Now who the hell is Clive Best, other than someone with a blog?

 

[Crick]

Why don't you show us one that failed?

It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded

Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century

The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.

So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?

Is this a simple choice of yours to tell yet another lie or do you actually believe I said anything resembling that contention? That is: are you dishonest or stupid? (Or both?)

 

[Old Rocks]

I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years. All of them have either come true or they will. None have yet been wrong. Here's one I made about Global Warming a few years back that hasn't come true but count on it, it will:

Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:

"See? It's because of our efforts that the planet did not warm or was kept from over- warming."

Take that to the bank people.

OK. And I will remind you in a few years of how utterly stupid you were.

 

[Crick]

Why don't you show us one that failed?

It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded

Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century

The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.

So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?

The "You can't prove it doesnt." argument coming in 10...9...8...

Who were you expecting to make such an argument and what would the "it" have been?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why don't you show us one that failed?

It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded

Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century

The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.

So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?

Is this a simple choice of yours to tell yet another lie or do you actually believe I said anything resembling that contention? That is: are you dishonest or stupid? (Or both?)

Call me a lair all day and night, that's OK. All we know for certain is your 0 for your lifetime in posting any lab experiment that shows a temperature increase from CO2

And that's the truth

 

[Crick]

I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years. All of them have either come true or they will. None have yet been wrong. Here's one I made about Global Warming a few years back that hasn't come true but count on it, it will:

Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:

"See? It's because of our efforts that the planet did not warm or was kept from over- warming."

Take that to the bank people.

"All of them" (not a single one named, repeated or identified) "have either come true or they will".

Wow... that's some impeccable logic, ain't it?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Now who the hell is Clive Best, other than someone with a blog?

he's far more honest than the AGW Cult

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why don't you show us one that failed?

It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded

Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century

The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.

So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?

The "You can't prove it doesnt." argument coming in 10...9...8...

Yeah, that's the Crick default response, and he calls me a liar too

 

[mamooth]

I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years.

And you've failed hard with every one. On the plus side, at least you're consistent.

That's one reason why the whole planet defines you and your cult as a sad joke. Other reasons are your delusional proclamations of victory, your constant conspiracy whining, and the way you insta-parrot all of your cult's dogma.

It will never get better for any of you denier fringe cultists. The world will keep laughing at you, when it's not ignoring you. I hope the emotional validation you all obtain from your cult affiliation is worth the lifetime of humiliation you've signed on for.

 

[Crick]

Why don't you show us one that failed?

It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded

Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century

The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.

So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?

Is this a simple choice of yours to tell yet another lie or do you actually believe I said anything resembling that contention? That is: are you dishonest or stupid? (Or both?)

Call me a lair all day and night, that's OK. All we know for certain is your 0 for your lifetime in posting any lab experiment that shows a temperature increase from CO2

And that's the truth

I get a clear image of Lily Tomlin' Edith Ann on R&M and SNL. Is that who you're channeling?

1) Show us documentation of a CO2 warming experiment that failed.

2) Explain the difference between the Earth's and other planet's calculated black body temperatures and their actual temperatures without making use of the greenhouse effect.

3) Explain how CO2 can absorb IR but not get warmer.

or

3) Explain why so many scientists have measured CO2 absorbing IR if it, in fact, does not.

4) Explain the warming of the 20th century without making use of the greenhouse effect?

5) Show us where I said I could not produce an experiment that "controls for varying amounts of CO2".

PS: I never called you a "lair".

 

[Crick]

and he calls me a liar too

Only when you lie, Frank, only when you lie.

 

[Saigon]

Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:

This really is a keeper of a comment....!

The thing that I particularly enjoy about it is that we have been arguing this topic here for some years now, and during that time we have seen unprecedented glacial melt, the collapse of Arctic ice, increased storm, rought & flood intensities, rising sea levels and coral bleaching - all things PredFan could go out and see with his own eyes tomorrow. All proven, all measurable, all happening as we speak.

And yet he is still talking about about what might happen years from now.....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

and he calls me a liar too

Only when you lie, Frank, only when you lie.

Because you still haven't posted any lab work?

 

[Saigon]

Oh, and Pred Fan...about the ice caps not disappearing....

Sea ice extent in October averaged 8.06 million square kilometers (3.11 million square miles). This is 850,000 square kilometers (328,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 long-term average of 8.91 million square kilometers (3.44 million square miles) and 1.29 million square kilometers (498,000 square miles) above the record low for the month observed in 2007.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why don't you show us one that failed?

It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded

Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century

The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.

So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?

Is this a simple choice of yours to tell yet another lie or do you actually believe I said anything resembling that contention? That is: are you dishonest or stupid? (Or both?)

Call me a lair all day and night, that's OK. All we know for certain is your 0 for your lifetime in posting any lab experiment that shows a temperature increase from CO2

And that's the truth

I get a clear image of Lily Tomlin' Edith Ann on R&M and SNL. Is that who you're channeling?

1) Show us documentation of a CO2 warming experiment that failed.

2) Explain the difference between the Earth's and other planet's calculated black body temperatures and their actual temperatures without making use of the greenhouse effect.

3) Explain how CO2 can absorb IR but not get warmer.

or

3) Explain why so many scientists have measured CO2 absorbing IR if it, in fact, does not.

4) Explain the warming of the 20th century without making use of the greenhouse effect?

5) Show us where I said I could not produce an experiment that "controls for varying amounts of CO2".

PS: I never called you a "lair".

See how fucked Crick and the Warmers are? They can't produce ANY lab work that controls for a wisp of CO2 so they resort to...

 

[Crick]

I gave you six questions by which, were your shit in one sock, you could have shot me down to the ground. Did you make the slightest attempt to answer ANY of them? No. I have to wonder why.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I gave you six questions by which, were your shit in one sock, you could have shot me down to the ground. Did you make the slightest attempt to answer ANY of them? No. I have to wonder why.

I'll get on it as soon as you post lab work that controls for wisps of CO2

 

[Crick]

Then get on it as that was done long ago and repeatedly.

 

[PredFan]

Why don't you show us one that failed?

It's your stupid "Theory", show us one (1) that succeeded

Koch failed your theory at the turn of the 20th Century

The difference between the temperature of the Earth and the other planets with respect to their calculated, black body temperatures is de facto evidence of the reality of the greenhouse effect. CO2's demonstrated absorption of IR bands not absorbed by water vapor or any other GHG unequivocally identifies its 'greenhouse' status. Demonstrations of the effect are manifold and you have already seen and read of several. Your contention that you have not, Frank, is a clear and demonstrable lie.

So you can't produce a single lab experiment that controls for varying amounts of CO2?

The "You can't prove it doesnt." argument coming in 10...9...8...

Who were you expecting to make such an argument and what would the "it" have been?

Any one of you AGW fools. But wasn't it you when asked to show an experiment where in creased CO2 corresponds to an increase in temp, you said; "Show me an experiment that shows it doesn't"?

 

[PredFan]

I've made a LOT of predictions here and on the other forum over the past 8 years. All of them have either come true or they will. None have yet been wrong. Here's one I made about Global Warming a few years back that hasn't come true but count on it, it will:

Global Warming as we know is bull shit. As time goes by while we are arguing this issue, the planet will not appreciably warm. The Ice Caps will not disappear, the oceans will continue to not rise, and we will have snow in the places it normally does. after a ceretain number of years when it's obvious that AGW didn't happen, the believers will say this:

"See? It's because of our efforts that the planet did not warm or was kept from over- warming."

Take that to the bank people.

"All of them" (not a single one named, repeated or identified) "have either come true or they will".

Wow... that's some impeccable logic, ain't it?

If I thought it would make a bit of difference, I would take the time to find and list them. But you are an ignorant left wing nut and no amount of proof ever budges you morons from what you believe, ever. I'm too lazy to do that work for nothing. But most importantly, it is irrelevant. The important thing is that I posted the prediction again for all to see.