Climate scientist Dr. Roy Spencer lays the smack to '2014 warmest year ever' nonsense

[jc456]

really, you're going with that eh? And you claim to be a scientist? You should turn in your degree!!!

Nice dodge. I take it by your omission that you are admitting to not having the capacity to answer my question. No surprises here.

Nice dodge? I asked about the universe. Why don't you start this off by answering my question first?

As soon as you answer my question by explaining what the origin of the universe has to do with the biological theory of evolution.

that wasn't the original question you arse. You answer the original question I asked, a question isn't an answer.

Your original question was "you can prove evolution, right"?

To which I responded "OMG. Thanks for proving my point." If you don't understand that response, you need to re-read the earlier posts.

Then you asked "so how did the universe start?" And my response questioning what the **** the origin of the universe has to do with the biological theory of evolution still stands as you have failed answer that question. You really should learn how to discuss these things in a reasonable fashion. A few college courses on these subjects might help, if you are up to it.

Moreover, this is not the thread in which to have these discussions, since they are irrelevant to the OP.

so you have links to provide to defend this? Just curious.

 

[orogenicman]

Since nothing I said above is wrong, and you've made no effort to counter it, instead opting for the personal attack, I have to assume that you are a troll trying to make political hay with long established scientific principles. If your come back is planning to be that I made a personal attack on jc456, I assure you it was nothing personal. Anyone who claims to be an engineer and yet doesn't understand the math behind the laws of thermodynamics isn't much of an engineer. That is true no matter the person making the claim.

Actually much of what you said is incorrect, but you posted known bunk and expect others to prove you wrong!

Prove a negative! Yes and who is tolling?

Typical far left drone..

And here we have a typical example of what to expect from deniers. Claim something is wrong without backing up the accusation and then claim the other guy expects something of you he most certainly doesn't. I don't expect you people to prove anything because you are incapable of proving anything. That often happens to the scientifically illiterate.

Prefect example of the far left and AGW cult mentality, post known bunk and expect everyone to prove them wrong!

But since this drone has claimed to be a "scientist" how about posting the datasets and source code that proves that CO2 controls climate..

You people don't get it. I don't have to prove anything. I've made no claim here. You people keep making negative and even contradictory claims about climate change. It is on you to support those claims. It is not on me to either refute them or support climate change. It already receives support from 97% of the scientists. As such, it is already accepted science. And when that happens, the burden of proof falls on the skeptics (you guys aren't skeptics, though, you are deniers - uneducated ones at that).

so perhaps we have you confused with the other lefts on here stating that our climate is changing due to humans contributing 120 PPMof extra CO2 in the atmosphere. If you do not agree with that, then I'm sure my peers will be happy to apologize for the request for the experiment. See, I had you confused with those who beleived that was indeed going on and destroying our planet. So do you believe that or not?

Contrary to your far right gullibilities, climate change is neither a left or right issue since people on both sides of the isle understand the reality of the situation. You make it a political issue to further a far right political agenda. I don't. I prefer to keep the politics out of it.

 

[orogenicman]

Nice dodge. I take it by your omission that you are admitting to not having the capacity to answer my question. No surprises here.

Nice dodge? I asked about the universe. Why don't you start this off by answering my question first?

As soon as you answer my question by explaining what the origin of the universe has to do with the biological theory of evolution.

that wasn't the original question you arse. You answer the original question I asked, a question isn't an answer.

Your original question was "you can prove evolution, right"?

To which I responded "OMG. Thanks for proving my point." If you don't understand that response, you need to re-read the earlier posts.

Then you asked "so how did the universe start?" And my response questioning what the **** the origin of the universe has to do with the biological theory of evolution still stands as you have failed answer that question. You really should learn how to discuss these things in a reasonable fashion. A few college courses on these subjects might help, if you are up to it.

Moreover, this is not the thread in which to have these discussions, since they are irrelevant to the OP.

so you have links to provide to defend this? Just curious.

Links to defend what? Are you brain dead? Have you even bothered to read this thread?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Contrary to your far right gullibilities, climate change is neither a left or right issue...

ROFLMNAO! D E L U S I O N PERSONIFIED!

"Global Warming" PKA: Chicken Little... is, as was the Global Warming of the early 20th Century... "Eugenics", ENTIRELY, WHOLLY, SOLEY A FUNCTION OF THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

But that is only because Left-think rests entirely upon Relativism.

Relativism is the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's cultural, societal, historical and personal context, and, as such can never be the result of soundly reasoned absolutes.

It is through this deviation in reason that relativism axiomatically rejects the objectivity which is essential to truth.

Which in short simply means that the Leftist has no means to even recognize truth, let alone stand up for it. What's more "SCIENCE!" which supports Global Warming is ALL SUBJECTIVE nonsense...

It's all a lie from Soup to Progressive.

 

[orogenicman]

Contrary to your far right gullibilities, climate change is neither a left or right issue...

ROFLMNAO! D E L U S I O N PERSONIFIED!

"Global Warming" PKA: Chicken Little... is, as was the Global Warming of the early 20th Century... "Eugenics", ENTIRELY, WHOLLY, SOLEY A FUNCTION OF THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

But that is only because Left-think rests entirely upon Relativism.

Relativism is the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's cultural, societal, historical and personal context, and, as such can never be the result of soundly reasoned absolutes.

It is through this deviation in reason that relativism axiomatically rejects the objectivity which is essential to truth.

Which in short simply means that the Leftist has no means to even recognize truth, let alone stand up for it. What's more "SCIENCE!" which supports Global Warming is ALL SUBJECTIVE nonsense...

It's all a lie from Soup to Progressive.

Wow, the slippery slope apparent in that rant is breathtaking. Oh dear.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Contrary to your far right gullibilities, climate change is neither a left or right issue...

ROFLMNAO! D E L U S I O N PERSONIFIED!

"Global Warming" PKA: Chicken Little... is, as was the Global Warming of the early 20th Century... "Eugenics", ENTIRELY, WHOLLY, SOLEY A FUNCTION OF THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT!

But that is only because Left-think rests entirely upon Relativism.

Relativism is the doctrine which holds that knowledge, truth, and morality exist only in relation to one's cultural, societal, historical and personal context, and, as such can never be the result of soundly reasoned absolutes.

It is through this deviation in reason that relativism axiomatically rejects the objectivity which is essential to truth.

Which in short simply means that the Leftist has no means to even recognize truth, let alone stand up for it. What's more "SCIENCE!" which supports Global Warming is ALL SUBJECTIVE nonsense...

It's all a lie from Soup to Progressive.

Wow, the slippery slope apparent in that rant is breathtaking. Oh dear.

There is no appeal to a slippery slope in that position. That position merely states the irrefutable fact, that the Ideological Left wholly and exclusively owns "Global Warming" AND that the ENTIRE notion is NONSENSE, absolutely NOTHING but fodder for fools.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

No, you're the only bringing politics into this. That's because you're brainwashed political cultist, a robotic true believer who insta-parrots whatever his masters tell him.

The rational people, OTOH, keep politics out of it. You should try it. Of course, if you couldn't rant about politics, you'd have nothing to say.

Global Warming is nothing BUT POLITICAL... You clowns can bray about 'SCIENCE!' all ya want... but there is NO science in the subjective farce known as Global Warming; er huh Pardon me, it's winter and with 3' of snow burying the Northeast tonight, it's winter... OKA: it's Climate Change Season

 

[jc456]

No, you're the only bringing politics into this. That's because you're brainwashed political cultist, a robotic true believer who insta-parrots whatever his masters tell him.

The rational people, OTOH, keep politics out of it. You should try it. Of course, if you couldn't rant about politics, you'd have nothing to say.

so, so stupid, holy crap I can't believe you wrote this. dododododododododododododo, this is all this deserves. But hey, which side is Robert Kennedy jr on?

RFK Jr wants to jail energy CEO s for Treason Laments no current laws to punish climate skeptics. - YouTube

 

[jc456]

so who wants to make this political?

 

[jc456]

Actually much of what you said is incorrect, but you posted known bunk and expect others to prove you wrong!

Prove a negative! Yes and who is tolling?

Typical far left drone..

And here we have a typical example of what to expect from deniers. Claim something is wrong without backing up the accusation and then claim the other guy expects something of you he most certainly doesn't. I don't expect you people to prove anything because you are incapable of proving anything. That often happens to the scientifically illiterate.

Prefect example of the far left and AGW cult mentality, post known bunk and expect everyone to prove them wrong!

But since this drone has claimed to be a "scientist" how about posting the datasets and source code that proves that CO2 controls climate..

You people don't get it. I don't have to prove anything. I've made no claim here. You people keep making negative and even contradictory claims about climate change. It is on you to support those claims. It is not on me to either refute them or support climate change. It already receives support from 97% of the scientists. As such, it is already accepted science. And when that happens, the burden of proof falls on the skeptics (you guys aren't skeptics, though, you are deniers - uneducated ones at that).

so perhaps we have you confused with the other lefts on here stating that our climate is changing due to humans contributing 120 PPMof extra CO2 in the atmosphere. If you do not agree with that, then I'm sure my peers will be happy to apologize for the request for the experiment. See, I had you confused with those who beleived that was indeed going on and destroying our planet. So do you believe that or not?

Contrary to your far right gullibilities, climate change is neither a left or right issue since people on both sides of the isle understand the reality of the situation. You make it a political issue to further a far right political agenda. I don't. I prefer to keep the politics out of it.

contrare,it is the left making it political. Here, just one from the political left. You wish to defend this crap?

RFK Jr wants to jail energy CEO s for Treason Laments no current laws to punish climate skeptics. - YouTube

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And here we have a typical example of what to expect from deniers. Claim something is wrong without backing up the accusation and then claim the other guy expects something of you he most certainly doesn't. I don't expect you people to prove anything because you are incapable of proving anything. That often happens to the scientifically illiterate.

Prefect example of the far left and AGW cult mentality, post known bunk and expect everyone to prove them wrong!

But since this drone has claimed to be a "scientist" how about posting the datasets and source code that proves that CO2 controls climate..

You people don't get it. I don't have to prove anything. I've made no claim here. You people keep making negative and even contradictory claims about climate change. It is on you to support those claims. It is not on me to either refute them or support climate change. It already receives support from 97% of the scientists. As such, it is already accepted science. And when that happens, the burden of proof falls on the skeptics (you guys aren't skeptics, though, you are deniers - uneducated ones at that).

so perhaps we have you confused with the other lefts on here stating that our climate is changing due to humans contributing 120 PPMof extra CO2 in the atmosphere. If you do not agree with that, then I'm sure my peers will be happy to apologize for the request for the experiment. See, I had you confused with those who beleived that was indeed going on and destroying our planet. So do you believe that or not?

Contrary to your far right gullibilities, climate change is neither a left or right issue since people on both sides of the isle understand the reality of the situation. You make it a political issue to further a far right political agenda. I don't. I prefer to keep the politics out of it.

contrare,it is the left making it political. Here, just one from the political left. You wish to defend this crap?

RFK Jr wants to jail energy CEO s for Treason Laments no current laws to punish climate skeptics. - YouTube

The Left is making 'it' political, because THAT is what the left does... it advances Deceit, through FRAUDULENT means, as a means to influence the Ignorant.

Remember the three fundamental elements of socialism?

Deceit, FRAUD and Ignorance... Take those traits out of the equation and the Left disappears instantly.

And THAT is how we can rest assured that "Global Warming" (used during the summer) and "Climate Change" (used during the winter) is a LIE. Total, 100% GRADE A Leftism... OKA: Bullshit.

 

[Old Rocks]

OK, Where, so you post a lot of unsupported flap yap, not a single link to support your idiotic accusations.

Once again, not a single Scientific Society, not a single National Academy of Science of any nation, and no major University states that AGW is incorrect. In fact, almost all of theise institutions have strong statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

So your posts tell us far more about you than the people you falsely accuse of being frauds.

 

[westwall]

OK, Where, so you post a lot of unsupported flap yap, not a single link to support your idiotic accusations.

Once again, not a single Scientific Society, not a single National Academy of Science of any nation, and no major University states that AGW is incorrect. In fact, almost all of theise institutions have strong statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

So your posts tell us far more about you than the people you falsely accuse of being frauds.

Actually they presented quite a bit of evidence that it is you lefties who have turned it into a political/religious issue. We argue science, you appeal to authority.

From the wiki so even you can understand it....


Fallacious examples of using the appeal include any appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence,[2][4][5][6] as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not a generally reliable argument for establishing facts.


Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Old Rocks]

Look an oncologist tells me I have cancer, and an auto mechanic is certain I do not. So believing the oncologist is an appeal to authority according to your arguement.

 

[westwall]

Look an oncologist tells me I have cancer, and an auto mechanic is certain I do not. So believing the oncologist is an appeal to authority according to your arguement.

So, you run from an appeal to authority to a non-sequitur. Not much for original thought are you?

 

[orogenicman]

And here we have a typical example of what to expect from deniers. Claim something is wrong without backing up the accusation and then claim the other guy expects something of you he most certainly doesn't. I don't expect you people to prove anything because you are incapable of proving anything. That often happens to the scientifically illiterate.

Prefect example of the far left and AGW cult mentality, post known bunk and expect everyone to prove them wrong!

But since this drone has claimed to be a "scientist" how about posting the datasets and source code that proves that CO2 controls climate..

You people don't get it. I don't have to prove anything. I've made no claim here. You people keep making negative and even contradictory claims about climate change. It is on you to support those claims. It is not on me to either refute them or support climate change. It already receives support from 97% of the scientists. As such, it is already accepted science. And when that happens, the burden of proof falls on the skeptics (you guys aren't skeptics, though, you are deniers - uneducated ones at that).

so perhaps we have you confused with the other lefts on here stating that our climate is changing due to humans contributing 120 PPMof extra CO2 in the atmosphere. If you do not agree with that, then I'm sure my peers will be happy to apologize for the request for the experiment. See, I had you confused with those who beleived that was indeed going on and destroying our planet. So do you believe that or not?

Contrary to your far right gullibilities, climate change is neither a left or right issue since people on both sides of the isle understand the reality of the situation. You make it a political issue to further a far right political agenda. I don't. I prefer to keep the politics out of it.

contrare,it is the left making it political. Here, just one from the political left. You wish to defend this crap?

RFK Jr wants to jail energy CEO s for Treason Laments no current laws to punish climate skeptics. - YouTube

He is not talking about politics. He is talking about holding CEOs accountable for their actions. That's a friggin legal issue, bubba.

 

[orogenicman]

OK, Where, so you post a lot of unsupported flap yap, not a single link to support your idiotic accusations.

Once again, not a single Scientific Society, not a single National Academy of Science of any nation, and no major University states that AGW is incorrect. In fact, almost all of theise institutions have strong statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

So your posts tell us far more about you than the people you falsely accuse of being frauds.

Actually they presented quite a bit of evidence that it is you lefties who have turned it into a political/religious issue. We argue science, you appeal to authority.

From the wiki so even you can understand it....


Fallacious examples of using the appeal include any appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence,[2][4][5][6] as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not a generally reliable argument for establishing facts.


Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are no authorities in science. There are, however, many experts.

 

[westwall]

OK, Where, so you post a lot of unsupported flap yap, not a single link to support your idiotic accusations.

Once again, not a single Scientific Society, not a single National Academy of Science of any nation, and no major University states that AGW is incorrect. In fact, almost all of theise institutions have strong statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

So your posts tell us far more about you than the people you falsely accuse of being frauds.

Actually they presented quite a bit of evidence that it is you lefties who have turned it into a political/religious issue. We argue science, you appeal to authority.

From the wiki so even you can understand it....


Fallacious examples of using the appeal include any appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence,[2][4][5][6] as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not a generally reliable argument for establishing facts.


Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are no authorities in science. There are, however, many experts.

Then why do their papers keep getting destroyed by non experts? Seems to me with a track record like that the statistician is the expert and the "experts" are the one's who are flailing. Remember, the Titanic was built by experts....

 

[orogenicman]

OK, Where, so you post a lot of unsupported flap yap, not a single link to support your idiotic accusations.

Once again, not a single Scientific Society, not a single National Academy of Science of any nation, and no major University states that AGW is incorrect. In fact, almost all of theise institutions have strong statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

So your posts tell us far more about you than the people you falsely accuse of being frauds.

Actually they presented quite a bit of evidence that it is you lefties who have turned it into a political/religious issue. We argue science, you appeal to authority.

From the wiki so even you can understand it....


Fallacious examples of using the appeal include any appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence,[2][4][5][6] as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not a generally reliable argument for establishing facts.


Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are no authorities in science. There are, however, many experts.

Then why do their papers keep getting destroyed by non experts? Seems to me with a track record like that the statistician is the expert and the "experts" are the one's who are flailing. Remember, the Titanic was built by experts....

They don't. The only ones who believe that are preliterates like you. The Titanic was built by capitalists who put profits
ahead of safety and structural integrity.

 

[westwall]

OK, Where, so you post a lot of unsupported flap yap, not a single link to support your idiotic accusations.

Once again, not a single Scientific Society, not a single National Academy of Science of any nation, and no major University states that AGW is incorrect. In fact, almost all of theise institutions have strong statements that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

So your posts tell us far more about you than the people you falsely accuse of being frauds.

Actually they presented quite a bit of evidence that it is you lefties who have turned it into a political/religious issue. We argue science, you appeal to authority.

From the wiki so even you can understand it....


Fallacious examples of using the appeal include any appeal to authority used in the context of logical reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence,[2][4][5][6] as authorities can come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not a generally reliable argument for establishing facts.


Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

There are no authorities in science. There are, however, many experts.

Then why do their papers keep getting destroyed by non experts? Seems to me with a track record like that the statistician is the expert and the "experts" are the one's who are flailing. Remember, the Titanic was built by experts....

They don't. The only ones who believe that are preliterates like you. The Titanic was built by capitalists who put profits
ahead of safety and structural integrity.

Really? Do tell.