TWO more Global Warming issues

[Ernie S.]

You never answered my question re police and prosecutors.
Once you do, perhaps I'll take you seriously enough to reply to with anything other than disdain.

 

[mamooth]

Investigated by the same folks who get to choose what peers get to do "peer review"?

Yeah. OK. Gotcha.

So, you favor imprisonment for your political enemies based on your unsupported conspiracy theories. How very Soviet of you.

You never answered my question re police and prosecutors.
Once you do, perhaps I'll take you seriously enough to reply to with anything other than disdain.

Because your question was an obvious attempt at evasion. Since you insist, let's check it out again.

If you had proof that police and prosecutors planted and altered evidence in a criminal case and conspired to withhold exculpatory evidence from the defense, would YOU favor sending them to the "gulag"?

If that was the case, sure.

Now what does that have to with your your very Soviet tactic of manufacturing phony fraud charges against Dr. Mann because your party wanted to make an example of someone that your party saw as a threat?

If you have proof of any crime by Dr. Mann, present it. If you have any evidence at all, present it. Doing science that TheParty doesn't like, however, is not a crime. Most deniers clearly want to classify certain things as thoughtcrime and make them illegal, but we won't allow it.

 

[Ernie S.]

The emails were all the proof needed.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes... like Marx, you believe that people will be more accepting of your l"progressive" ideas and polices, once they are correctly indoctrinated... er... educated... by the state.

Stick to Groucho Marx......your ignorance of political structures is evident...Just go on waving little Chinese-made, US flags to make you feel more "patriotic."

Sorry that you refuse to understand how correct I am.
Like always, your ignorance is willful.

 

[M14 Shooter]

M14, are you ever going to locate your balls and tell us your theory of global warming?

Right after you decide to understand that I need to do such thing, that the onus is fully on you to prove YOUR theory correct.

So far, we have determined that you you know cannot prove your statement that the earth was to cool for another 20,000 years, the basis upon which your entire premise is based. That being the case, you have yet to prove your theory.

Until you do that, you know have nothing; because you cannot prove the above, you will always have nothing.
Failure: Yours

 

[M14 Shooter]

This whole exchange reminds me of the lore around Galileo when he encouraged his cardinal critics to simply, "look through the [fucking] telescope.." and they all refused....Why???
Because their long-held convictions would be shattered and they would rather cling to their biases than accept reality.

This describes you quite well. Nicely done.

 

[mamooth]

You understand you're sort of speaking in tongues now, right?

I think I get the gist of it. You're telling everyone you don't have to support your theory, because you're special.

And you're right. You don't have to support it, and in return, nobody has to take you seriously.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You understand you're sort of speaking in tongues now, right?

I think I get the gist of it. You're telling everyone you don't have to support your theory, because you're special.

And you're right. You don't have to support it, and in return, nobody has to take you seriously.

Says he who knows he cannot prove his theory, as demonstrated.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Mann and Hansen think we should be shot without trial as an example to those who might deny their lies.. How Communist of them..

Telling big lies about how you were forced to imprison your enemies to defend yourself is a tactic that's been used by pretty much every tyrant in history. Billy, a proud student of Stalin, has learned that big lie technique well.

Back to the point. Not a single denier on this board has ever criticized the Republicans for their attempts to imprison climate scientists, despite me asking if they would over and over. Not one. Ever. They all endorse the tactic, using the same excuses the Soviet communists did about how EnemiesoftheState are criminals who deserve imprisonment.

In direct contrast, no reason-based person here has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned.

The two sides are totally different. Deniers are authoritarians, while the reason-based side values freedom.

Your Stalinist tactics wont work fool.. We all see right through your lies and deceit.

 

[Billy_Bob]

You understand you're sort of speaking in tongues now, right?

I think I get the gist of it. You're telling everyone you don't have to support your theory, because you're special.

And you're right. You don't have to support it, and in return, nobody has to take you seriously.

Says he who knows he cannot prove his theory, as demonstrated.

Snageltooth cant back up anything.. I have asked many times for it to do so, but all it does is throw ad-hom bombs and deflect..

 

[jc456]

M14, are you ever going to locate your balls and tell us your theory of global warming?

Nah. You won't. Authoritarian types -- which most all deniers are -- never back up their claims. They simply declare everyone has to obey, and they get so outraged when free people won't comply with their edicts.

I don't have to ask if M14 or Ernie support sending climate scientists to the gulag for disagreeing with their political party. Their party supports that Stalinist tactic, so they also support it, period. See, watch. I can ask them, and they won't deny it.

Ernie and M14, do you support or condemn the Republicans for attempting to jail Dr. Mann and other climate scientists?

thread hijacking here, so tooth, what is your theory of global warming, seems you're always asking everyone and I don't recall ever seeing yours. Point me to a link you may have already given it and I missed it. But please I'd like to know.

 

[jc456]

The alarmist cant do anything on facts. they lie, demean, and use Alyisnky tactic to try and silence people. They Duck, Dodge, Dive and Deflect in order to not answer any question with substance. Its like a dodge-ball game..

This whole exchange reminds me of the lore around Galileo when he encouraged his cardinal critics to simply, "look through the [fucking] telescope.." and they all refused....Why???
Because their long-held convictions would be shattered and they would rather cling to their biases than accept reality.

You right wing idiots remind of that same situation wanting "proof" that is so damn incremental that it would never satisfy those who would rather cling to their stupidity and, in this case, based MORE on moronic political prejudices.

I really don't give a crap about right wing ignorance, nor would I want to change their prejudices...Whatever global catastrophes may indeed precipitate, their will not occur within our lifetime......so, right wingers, this whole exchange was just an exercise in futility. ...stay as dumb as you are now.

and yet no answer to the question. funny you can't can you?

 

[jc456]

Mann and Hansen think we should be shot without trial as an example to those who might deny their lies.. How Communist of them..

Telling big lies about how you were forced to imprison your enemies to defend yourself is a tactic that's been used by pretty much every tyrant in history. Billy, a proud student of Stalin, has learned that big lie technique well.

Back to the point. Not a single denier on this board has ever criticized the Republicans for their attempts to imprison climate scientists, despite me asking if they would over and over. Not one. Ever. They all endorse the tactic, using the same excuses the Soviet communists did about how EnemiesoftheState are criminals who deserve imprisonment.

In direct contrast, no reason-based person here has ever called for deniers to be imprisoned.

The two sides are totally different. Deniers are authoritarians, while the reason-based side values freedom.

which republicans and who did they try and imprison? come now let's start seeing some documentation hairball.

 

[jc456]

You understand you're sort of speaking in tongues now, right?

I think I get the gist of it. You're telling everyone you don't have to support your theory, because you're special.

And you're right. You don't have to support it, and in return, nobody has to take you seriously.

theory of what please?

 

[jc456]

oh and still no answers to the original questions by the two outlanders.

 

[bripat9643]

Huh? This is the level of mentality which represents the "science is settled" position.

Dingbat........what I'm referring to is the relatively short period of time since MAN made an entrance on this planet and the variations that occurred PRIOR to that doesn't really matter since we were not around.....but NOW we are and those 'natural changes" are exacerbated by our own man-made pollution....so, NOW IT MATTERS if we wish to survive.

A fact not in evidence.

You're begging the question. You're assuming your conclusion is true even though you have yet to prove it.

 

[bripat9643]

Do you have information to the contrary?

You want me to show that one should not cherrypick a single location and then declare it to be the temperature proxy for the entire planet? I'd think that would fall under the "totally freakin' obvious" category.

Can you show that the information is not illustrative of the point made with it?

Here's temps since the last ice age. Note the slow cooling for the past 5000 years. Note that current temps aren't on that graph, but have suddenly jumped to over 0.5, a kind of spike never seen before.

Another AGW cult moron posts the discredited Hockey Stick fraud for the 1000th time.

 

[bripat9643]

Take your "the sky is falling" and stick it. NO measurable warming for over 17 years,doofus

Only the most desperate cultists still cling to a lie that crazy. Especially after 2014 was the record hot year, and as 2015 is shaping up to be even hotter.

Oh, this is where you now pull your final retreat to "ALL THE DATA IS FAKED!". All conspiracy cultists get there eventually. Some of the people here have already staked out a conspiracy fortress there, so you'll have good company.

 

[jc456]

Do you have information to the contrary?

You want me to show that one should not cherrypick a single location and then declare it to be the temperature proxy for the entire planet? I'd think that would fall under the "totally freakin' obvious" category.

Can you show that the information is not illustrative of the point made with it?

Here's temps since the last ice age. Note the slow cooling for the past 5000 years. Note that current temps aren't on that graph, but have suddenly jumped to over 0.5, a kind of spike never seen before.

Another AGW cult moron posts the discredited Hockey Stick fraud for the 1000th time.

I still have crickets. Funny, they have no evidence and come in here and spout as if they did. It's hard not to post the same thing over and over again since that is what they continue to do. And,....then report us for repeating posts. It's fricking grand. None of them have accepted my challenge to provide evidence to their claim. Not since I've been in here. Just one of them prove that 20 PPM of CO2 does anything to temperatures. Oh, and how about giving us data on how warm the earth should be. I got a whole lot of mumbo jumbo from tooth.

Then he/she claims I lied. it's like dude/dudette, get a flippin life.

 

[mamooth]

Bri, when I point out how only cult kooks declare all the data is faked because all the actual data contradicts their cult, you really shouldn't jump in so quickly to prove my point. But hey, since none of your fraudster buddies have been willing to address the issue of why they constantly attempt that same fraud you just attempted, maybe you can be the first denier here to display some courage by explaining your motivation for scamming.

The overall global adjustments to the temperature record make the global warming look smaller, which makes the denier conspiracy theory look insanely stupid and flagrantly dishonest. That is not in question, that the adjustments make the global warming look smaller. If someone says the opposite, then they are lying. It really is that simple.

So, why do almost all deniers still so proudly tell that lie? Bri, can you explain? Are you lying deliberately, justifying your big lie by telling yourself it's for everyone's own good? Or have you just been brainwashed by your cult into auto-parroting whatever nonsense they feed you?

In any case, you should understand that constantly trying to peddle such fraud only makes you look like the devoted acolyte of a liars' cult. Such dishonesty is the #2 reason why the world ignores your cult. And as you're too deep in the cult to leave now, you won't care. You'll just retreat deeper into your conspiracy nonsense, invoking newer and bigger conspiracies to explain why all the new data also contradicts your cult. Denialism is literally now nothing but a conspiracy cult.

And jc, you need to understand that you embarrass your fellow cultists, and they wish you'd be quiet.