Just got back to the office. It's really cold out there. The wind just goes right through you. That cold wind has fossil fuel written all over it.
Boy the trees budding out sure are pretty.
- Thread starter anon_xl72qcu5isp39
- Start date
You might as well post used toilet paper and ask me to engage it. So... The Federalist has a skeptic's view. How surprising.
http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2017/02/Curry-2017.pdf
Judith Curry on Pruitt's recent statements:
"If I am interpreting his statements correctly, I do not find anything to disagree with in what he said: We don’t know how much of recent warming can be attributed to humans. In my opinion, this is correct and is a healthy position for both the science and the policy debate."
Judith Curry on Pruitt's recent statements:
"If I am interpreting his statements correctly, I do not find anything to disagree with in what he said: We don’t know how much of recent warming can be attributed to humans. In my opinion, this is correct and is a healthy position for both the science and the policy debate."
Yes Glove, let me waste some more time trying to engage you. Every time a question takes you off the Federalist/professional skeptic/tobacco denial script this is what happens.
And I answered you more than you have EVER engaged any idea that takes you off the AGW talking points reservation.
It's a stupid question. Convince me of what exactly?
Nothing will ever convince me that the science, as currently understood, is sufficient to dictate public policy and to fundamentally alter the world's economic order and energy usage.
Nothing will ever convince me that a very substantial portion (certainly not all) of research on the subject, and in particular the presentation and reporting of such research is undertaken with a political agenda and that steps have been undertaken in many case to alter the data or to hide inconvenient findings. The spirit and practice of many in the AGW crowd is the antithesis of science and the scientific method.
It's an easy question and you ducked it. Your financial statement is the reason nothing will ever convince you. You should at least be intellectually honest enough to admit it instead of all the mental gymnastics like you give a shit about science.
That's a laugh. You're easily the most intellectually dishonest person who posts here. Easily.
I'd wager I've read 500 times more on the subject than you. I'm not in the energy industry. My financial statement won't be impacted nearly as severely as low to moderate income families and individuals who won't be able to pay their energy bills if this country follows through on the crazy bullshit that would have zero measurable impact to begin with.
Yes. Of course. "The science is settled and it's past time for debate" sure sounds like good science. I wish medicine would operate with the same MO. It only seems soooooo logical and well within accepted scientific practice to stifle any debate or dissention from the political narrative, er I mean science.
As usual, you're wrong. I don't dispute that you've probably read more than 500 times on the subject than me, but 499% of it is parroting the same tobacco skepticism arguments. You parrot them right down the line. I can write the script at this point.
I can't compete with you. First, I don't have the bandwidth or free time to read inside the echo chamber like you do. Do you have a job? Second, you don't have the self awareness to ask yourself, "What degree of proof would convince me?" and you duck it each time you're asked. That's exhibit "A" that you simply have an agenda and aren't interested in a search for the truth -- you only want to validate your usual "only me" political ethos. Last, would you autograph your picture for me?
As usual, you're wrong. I don't dispute that you've probably read more than 500 times on the subject than me, but 499% of it is parroting the same tobacco skepticism arguments. You parrot them right down the line. I can write the script at this point.
I can't compete with you. First, I don't have the bandwidth or free time to read inside the echo chamber like you do. Do you have a job? Second, you don't have the self awareness to ask yourself, "What degree of proof would convince me?" and you duck it each time you're asked. That's exhibit "A" that you simply have an agenda and aren't interested in a search for the truth -- you only want to validate your usual "only me" political ethos. Last, would you autograph your picture for me?
As per usual, dishonest bullshit and ad hominen nonsense. It's all you've got.
Weather is pretty good this morning. Made my rounds without a heavy jacket. Wind is way down so it should be quite a bit more pleasant than yesterday. Get to enjoy the tulips in my front yard a little early this year. It's nice. It looks like the arctic blast may hurt the cherry blossom blooms in DC.
The beautiful thing about ditching global warming and global cooling in favor of "climate change" (which of course is a perfectly natural event) is that the politicians, errrr I mean scientists can blame anything on it without sounding as dumb as they used to. Great way to amp up the alarmism.
That's another intellectually dishonest, classic skeptic argument. It's anti-science. Science builds on knowledge. Oncologists have totally changed their theories and approaches over the last 30 years, too. Saying that any change in the science suggests incompetence lacks intellectual honesty.
During exercise, the human body puts off heat which can lead to catastrophic changes in the earths atmosphere - Al Gore (probably)
I'll limit my stretching before hand, but I had some good Mexican food for lunch and I can't be held to account for what gas is emitted while swinging. I swing with quite a bit of force and it just slips sometimes.
Sent. Someone tried to scam me just yesterday so I hope this is the real deal. Just treat me fair, that is my AMEX Black card.
Scam, geez. Everyone knows that when the sea levels rise in the next 5, 200, 500, 82,000000000000000 years or so, the people of California are all going to drive toward Nevada and cause the state to tip over. You're dumb if you think that stuff can only happen to Guam.
I've thought about this on and off while taking dumps, and I have my answer for you @syskatine. I will take a serious look at the "settled science" and rethink my position on it when just one single dire prediction that has been made by the climate hysterics over the years actually comes true. Time and time and time and time again, these retarded predictions, BASED ON THEIR "SETTLED SCIENCE," are made with alarm and panic for all of mankind, often directly followed by costly regulations of some sort and attempts to monetize the "solutions" (shit like cap and trade carbon exchange). They've been wrong every single time. Let that sink in for a moment. When the failed prediction is brought up, the alarmists change their story, attempt to censor, mumble stupidly, and begin chasing some other "new" revelations, make new predictions, wash, rinse, repeat, only to be wrong AGAIN. You'd think that if the science was so settled they could actually accurately predict at least one thing and have it come true. One solitary thing. Just one. One. I'd be completely embarrassed for cancer research if cancer researchers and oncologists had the same track record as our climate scientists.
In the meantime, I calls it as I sees it, complete bullshit, because that's what exactly what they've presented with their "settled science."
Here's a pretty good read on the history of the failed predictions based on that "settled science"
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech...predictions-haunt-the-global-warming-industry
Frikin fantastic out there today. Love the "warming". I found this article that I think everyone needs to read. We are on the verge of solving our obesity problems world wide. The "warming" will shrink everybody. No more oprah diets or richard simmons jazzersize shit. Just get out there and live and let Co2 take care of the rest. This. Is. Awesome.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ient-mammals-SHRANK-global-warming-event.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ient-mammals-SHRANK-global-warming-event.html
