- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nobel Winner to Obama on Global Warming: 'Mr. President, You're Wrong'
Posted on 11/18/16 at 1:41 pm to olddawg26
Posted on 11/18/16 at 1:41 pm to olddawg26
quote:
hy THE frick are you asking me? Go ask a professional
So you havent taken your own advice then?
The one who is screeching the loudest that there is a problem but offers no solution is usually just ignored. That seems to make you angry but I'm not sure what other outcome you could reasonably expect.
1
Posted on 11/18/16 at 1:49 pm to duckdude
So much idiocy in this thread. Can't have a legitimate discussion with 1)people who have their mind made up, and 2) can't or don't want to understand basic science like evaporation/condensation or even whether ice expands or contracts when melting (of which I've seen both answers by multiple people in this thead). Ridiculous. For the record, when ice melts it takes up less volume than ice. Also for the record, that has zero to do with whether ocean levels would rise.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:13 pm to airfernando
Exactly and what kind of science accolades do Obama and Gore have that makes them more credible? I'll wait....
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:14 pm to UncleFestersLegs
I've said repeatedly I just got back from a NOAA seminar. I've heard the entire story. Anymore assumptions?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:15 pm to philter
quote:
For the record, when ice melts it takes up less volume than ice.
Which wouldn't matter if that ice was on land. Like what I've been saying for 3 pages.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:17 pm to olddawg26
quote:
I've said repeatedly I just got back from a NOAA seminar. I've heard the entire story
It's not possible that you heard the entire story. NOAA doesn't allow presentations by GW denying scientists. It was the same with Montreal Protocol and Kyoto Conference. All of their presentations were banned. It's called propaganda. And you fell for it.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:24 pm to Zach
quote:
NOAA doesn't allow presentations by GW denying scientists.
All 10 of them? You're telling me i "fell for it" like this isn't a credible theory, like El Niño had nothing to do with where some of the deniers started their research, you're wrong on this one.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:31 pm to olddawg26
quote:
All 10 of them?
Oh, there are a LOT of them. But thanks for admitting that you heard NONE of them because they are banned. That's why it's called a scam.
And they use graphs to promote the scam a lot.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:34 pm to Zach
So the entire section blocked off in the London natural history museum with the climate scientists that stand there answering your questions, that's all a hoax? Even when they prove their own work to be wrong sometimes? Did they hide Antarcticas ice growing? Did German scientists not just create a better way to absorb carbon in the atmosphere? Why go against their own hoax?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:36 pm to olddawg26
BTW, a good illustration of GW advocates faking data is the 'list of scientists who believe in man made global warming' and it's coming disasters.
About 50 of the scientists on the list were climate denying scientists. They didn't care. They just lied.
One of the funniest was Prof. Sherwood Idso. He's a leading proponent of increased CO2 levels and critic of the GW alarmists. This is Idso...
LINK
But they still listed him as an advocate for decreasing CO2 and warning of the coming doom. He was somewhat amused until he saw his fellow deniers also listed as GW enthusiasts.
About 50 of the scientists on the list were climate denying scientists. They didn't care. They just lied.
One of the funniest was Prof. Sherwood Idso. He's a leading proponent of increased CO2 levels and critic of the GW alarmists. This is Idso...
LINK
But they still listed him as an advocate for decreasing CO2 and warning of the coming doom. He was somewhat amused until he saw his fellow deniers also listed as GW enthusiasts.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:38 pm to Zach
Would you be willing to bet that 2016 2017 2018 will be the hottest on record? Why or why not?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:41 pm to olddawg26
quote:
So the entire section blocked off in the London natural history museum with the climate scientists that stand there answering your questions, that's all a hoax?
Correct. It's as easy as me finding 40 experts to meet and tell the audience that Hillary Clinton was cheated out of the recent election. It's called 'selecting the conclusion you want.' I'm surprised that you are not familiar with this. Have you graduated HS yet?
quote:
Even when they prove their own work to be wrong sometimes?
They don't prove their work wrong. Their peers do and when they get caught (as NASA has MANY times) they claim it was a mistake and this new computer model is correct. Then they are caught again. Wash, rinse, repeat.
quote:
Did they hide Antarcticas ice growing?
Absolutely. And then they got caught.
quote:
Did German scientists not just create a better way to absorb carbon in the atmosphere?
Good for them. But there are already natural methods of absorbing CO2. Have you heard of plants?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:43 pm to olddawg26
quote:
Would you be willing to bet that 2016 2017 2018 will be the hottest on record? Why or why not?
No. Because the data is falsified. They already got caught with the placement of weather stations. 1,000s of them were placed near pavement, industrial AC vents, etc.
We have been in a flat line on temp for 20 years. No warming at all. That's why they changed the name from 'Global Warming' to 'Climate Change'. Why do you think they made the switch? Hmmm?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:47 pm to Zach
lol never mind can't argue with this level of delusion.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:49 pm to olddawg26
quote:
lol never mind can't argue with this level of delusion.
Translation: "I feel like a fricking idiot."
But that's OK. I've gotta check out anyway. Mysteries at the Museum is on my TIVO.
Have a nice day.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:50 pm to olddawg26
I dont think anyone from either side knows enough about the climate to make the choice of whether its man-made or not. There are just to many variables at play for us to know. And I don't like the way any scientist who disagrees (no matter how much experience they have in climate science) is labeled a denier they same way someone who questions anything about the holocaust is. Thats not scientific discovery, its an agenda.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:51 pm to Zach
I don't feel dumb at all you old frick. You're set in your ways. I've seen it first hand, if you want to get all feisty with me I'll gladly give it back, but until you go to the data sources, talk to an expert and ask them yourself with your own time, you're worthless in a debate
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:53 pm to olddawg26
quote:
Please ask a professional and not the TD poliboard about science issues.
Those that post on TD poli-board that possess PhDs in engineering and hard science are not professionals? There at least a couple posting in this thread.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:55 pm to EA6B
Engineers would not be profession experts on climate no. And wherever they are they seem to be mighty quiet during these sorts of debates where they know how to read data and use critical thinking skills.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 2:56 pm to olddawg26
quote:
but until you go to the data sources, talk to an expert and ask them yourself with your own time, you're worthless in a debate
Is it acceptable if I were to ask Dr. Roy Spencer? Is he an expert in your opinion? Or as you say a kook?
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News