Three Big Supporters Throw Climate Hoaxers Overboard

[Meister]

No Gore's not a scientist but he's a fraud.

Who gives a fuck? Do you want to talk about science or about Al Gore?

Al Gore is the leader of the global warming cult.

Talking about al gore's cult is a lot better than talking about tainted science, anyday.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

No, the above is part of a ruling of a judge of a British Court.

That's great. When you're ready to talk about the science, let me know.

This was already said.

The court made it's ruling based on the scientific evidence presented to them.

The court doesn't generate it's own scientific evidence.

that's awesome for them. They aren't scientists. Legal proceedings are irrelevant and not subject to peer review and run by people who are not scientists. I can't believe I actually have to explain this.

 

[Oddball]

Peer review is still a dead letter, Skippy.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

We know we've produced more than enough to account for the rise.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

No. But nice try. Sure made you look smart for a second.

If you cannot definitively quantify it, you don't have science.

Wrong. You do not have to "definitively" quantify anything, in fact it isn't even possible. All measurements come with errors and all calculations based on measurements have accuracy ranges, there is no "definitive" quantity in science.

I can quantify both gravity and electricity, even though I cannot prove how they happen at the molecular level...Your favored science fiction can't come anywhere near clearing that hurdle.

You can't "definitively quantify" them.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Peer review is still a dead letter, Skippy.

Ok

does anyone wanna talk about science?

 

[CMike]

There's nothing to challenge. There's no page numbers cited. Its not possible to check the source. The pamphlet is thus utterly useless.

What an idiot

Have fun.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/aqrs/reports/napapreport05.pdf

Why did you link to the 2005 report? Its the report published in 1991 that they are referring to. Are you a moron?

Because it refers to that study as well.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

What an idiot

Have fun.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/aqrs/reports/napapreport05.pdf

Why did you link to the 2005 report? Its the report published in 1991 that they are referring to. Are you a moron?

Because it refers to that study as well.

And.... so what? What do you want me to do with it?

 

[CMike]

If you want to examine the study, then get what you want and study it.

I quoted from it. If you think it's false, the onus is on you to prove it.

Global warming is not a scientific issue, it's a political one.

 

[Oddball]

Peer review is still a dead letter, Skippy.

Ok

does anyone wanna talk about science?

Your "science" is largely based upon the academic political echo chamber that is "peer review", and they're both dead letters.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

If you want to examine the study, then get what you want and study it.

I quoted from it. If you think it's false, the onus is on you to prove it.

Global warming is not a scientific issue, it's a political one.

I need to know the PAGE NUMBER

The 1991 study is a 520 page report

If the pamphlet writers actually wanted people to verify their claims about what they say the study says, they would have put the page number

http://openlibrary.org/b/OL17661812M/1990_integrated_assessment_report

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Peer review is still a dead letter, Skippy.

Ok

does anyone wanna talk about science?

Your "science" is largely based upon the academic political echo chamber that is "peer review", and they're both dead letters.

All scientific literature is subject to peer review. That's how science is done. I'm sorry you're so willfully, ignorant, but its kind of your fault.

 

[Oddball]

We know we've produced more than enough to account for the rise.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

No. But nice try. Sure made you look smart for a second.

Translation: "I got nothing".

Wrong. You do not have to "definitively" quantify anything, in fact it isn't even possible. All measurements come with errors and all calculations based on measurements have accuracy ranges, there is no "definitive" quantity in science.

I can quantify both gravity and electricity, even though I cannot prove how they happen at the molecular level...Your favored science fiction can't come anywhere near clearing that hurdle.

You can't "definitively quantify" them.

I'm sure the people who've been selling electronic multimeters and the electricians who use them would be interested to know that.

 

[Oddball]

Ok

does anyone wanna talk about science?

Your "science" is largely based upon the academic political echo chamber that is "peer review", and they're both dead letters.

All scientific literature is subject to peer review. That's how science is done. I'm sorry you're so willfully, ignorant, but its kind of your fault.

Bullshit.

I don't need your holy "peer review" to show that rising warm moist air forms cumulus clouds....I can prove that, first time every time, and falsify for all other plausible explanations, to the layman on the street....The same cannot be said for your fraud of science fiction.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Translation: "I got nothing".

No, the phrase doesn't actually apply. The mere fact the rising CO2 levels happened after we produced a bunch of CO2 isn't how we know the latter caused the former - its that - plus the fact that the former involves a measured increase of CO2 in the atmosphere while the latter involves producing CO2 and releasing it into the atmosphere, and the fact that the measured amount released is more than enough to account for the measured amount in the atmosphere.

I can quantify both gravity and electricity, even though I cannot prove how they happen at the molecular level...Your favored science fiction can't come anywhere near clearing that hurdle.

You can't "definitively quantify" them.

I'm sure the people who've been selling electronic multimeters and the electricians who use them would be interested to know that. [/QUOTE]



The people who sell electronic multimeters are well aware nothing can be "definitively quantified" as you claim, that's why all multimeters come with manuals containing their accuracy ranges.

How does it feel to be the dumbest person in the world?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I don't need your holy "peer review" to show that rising warm moist air forms cumulus clouds....

Of course not, that's because you can reference scientific literature that has already undergone peer review.

Seriously, how does it feel to be the dumbest person in the world?

 

[Oddball]

Wow.....Just wow.

I had no idea that electricity measured down to the nanojoule still isn't positively quantified!

Schmuck.

 

[Oddball]

What's next...We going to rename Ohm's Law to "Ohm's Best Guess"?

 

[The T]

MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX. IF YOU STILL BELIEVE IN THIS MONEY GRABING CON GAME THEN I PITY YOU. Al Gore should go to jail with all of these other scientist/frauds. Has anyone stopped to think of all the harm that's been done with this bullshit hoax not only in America but all around the world.

Al Gore isn't a scientist.

Global warming is not a hoax, sorry.

No Gore's not a scientist but he's a fraud. Look at his profits over this carbon trading hoax we all complain about exorbitant profits, well lets look at this snake oil salesman's books.

Yep. OwlGore and his like have complained of profits from companies like oil...and let us NOT forget that OwlGore himself has a huge stake in OIL, and Tobacco...and now CARBON Profits.

He's a FRAUD. He's been CAUGHT.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Wow.....Just wow.

I had no idea that electricity measured down to the nanojoule still isn't positively quantified!

Schmuck.

First it was "definitively quantified" then it was just "quantified" now its "positively quantitified" ... seriously, you're just making it up as you go along, right? You haven't a clue what the fuck you're talking about, do you?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

What's next...We going to rename Ohm's Law to "Ohm's Best Guess"?

You are aware that if the numbers you put into an equation have uncertainties, the result has an uncertainty?


Seriously, did you even take science in high school? What failed public school did you attend, really?