General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
ephekt
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuckyouformakingmeregister View Post
Temperatures dropping in 1 year (even 5 years) doesn't disprove global warming. It's the long term trends, not the short term variations that are important. Like this:


Source: http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/gr-ar4-wg1.htm

I'm sure if you morons had been around in the early 1980s during the brief dip you'd all be saying the same shit. And you'd have been wrong.
The IPCC is hardly a credible source since they were caught fudging their data. Additionally, refrencing the IPCC when they have completely failed to prove that human activities are causing global warming is beyond stupid.

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclu...level_data.htm
http://newsbusters.org/node/13698
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2008...th-noisy-data/

In fact, warming pundits (I'd hardly call these guys scientists) have been falsifying data for a long, long time.

" In order to get their models to produce predictions that are close to their designers’ expectations, modelers resort to “flux adjustments” that can be 25 times larger than the effect of doubling carbon dioxide concentrations, the supposed trigger for global warming. Richard A. Kerr, a writer for Science, says “climate modelers have been ‘cheating’ for so long it’s almost become respectable.”


Also, satellite readings of the lower troposphere (an area warming pundits agree should show evidence of warming if it existed) showing no evidence of warming, and nearly every single warming prediction is based on computer modeling rather than historical data.

Last edited by ephekt; 03-29-2008 at 12:52 AM..
Old 03-29-2008, 12:41 AM ephekt is offline  
Reply With Quote
#166  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Fuckyouformakingmeregister
wall candy eating retard
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock View Post
sorry shit for brains. you posted "experts" saying that all other effects are ruled out. and that left ONLY co2 as the instigator/prime component

Only Co2 could have the effect on that scale needed

ONLY PROBLEM IS YOU STUPID BITCH IS THAT IF THAT WAS THE CASE THE EARTH COULD NEVER COOL DOWN AGAIN WITHOUT A CATASTROPHIC INTERVENTION THAT IS NOT EVIDENT IN THE RECORD AS UNEARTHED BY 12 BRANCHES OF SCIENCE.

get it yet you wall candy eating fuckhead?

Apparently you don't get it. I just told you that leaks/sinks in the carbon cycle could remove CO2 from the atmosphere. You don't need a catastrophic event.

And I assume you agree with my assessment of your logic since you posted no defense.
Old 03-29-2008, 06:36 AM Fuckyouformakingmeregister is offline  
Reply With Quote
#167  

Fuckyouformakingmeregister
wall candy eating retard
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock View Post
YOu fucking moron MY story about GiGantic co2 levels in the past?

YOu MORON its the Global Warming junk science that tried to Use those clouds to PROOVE it was co2 to the general populace till EVERYONE WITH A FUCKING BRAIN was clued into the FACT(thats'sFACT that co2 ALWAYS lags warming for the last million years

I would ask you to use a real argument but alas Only a jesuit could take your position and even attempt to confuse people

Real argument? If you paid attention I said even if we assume your unsubstantiated story about gigantic CO2 levels with million year lags in the past is true, it doesn't actually rule out the possibility that current CO2 levels are causing warming or amplifying a natural warming process.
Old 03-29-2008, 06:40 AM Fuckyouformakingmeregister is offline  
Reply With Quote
#168  

Fuckyouformakingmeregister
wall candy eating retard
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ephekt View Post
The IPCC is hardly a credible source since they were caught fudging their data. Additionally, refrencing the IPCC when they have completely failed to prove that human activities are causing global warming is beyond stupid.

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclu...level_data.htm
http://newsbusters.org/node/13698
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2008...th-noisy-data/

I guess we can chalk another one up for the secret science conspiracy theory argument.

Quote:
In fact, warming pundits (I'd hardly call these guys scientists) have been falsifying data for a long, long time.

" In order to get their models to produce predictions that are close to their designers’ expectations, modelers resort to “flux adjustments” that can be 25 times larger than the effect of doubling carbon dioxide concentrations, the supposed trigger for global warming. Richard A. Kerr, a writer for Science, says “climate modelers have been ‘cheating’ for so long it’s almost become respectable.”
It doesn't matter if you'd call them scientists or not. They are scientists. It's kind of funny you believe Richard Kerr, who isn't a practicing scientist, over people who have spent years studying the issues. It's also worth mentioning that I can't actually find the article where he says that - it just something anti-warming websites seem to post.

I did find this though:
Quote:
Well, both poles are experiencing some warming but they're very different situations. In the south. And the Antarctic. The ice has been particularly hard hit on the Palmer Peninsula, the land jutting up toward South America. And there, we've all heard about the big chunks of shelf ice breaking way from the peninsula and drifting off as huge icebergs
Source:http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...31/smn.07.html

So apparently he does think the earth is warming.

Quote:
Also, satellite readings of the lower troposphere (an area warming pundits agree should show evidence of warming if it existed) showing no evidence of warming, and nearly every single warming prediction is based on computer modeling rather than historical data.
Provide a reasonable source and then maybe this can be discussed.

EDIT: Found some info on the troposphere and your claims seem to be based on dated UAH satelitte data info, which was, incidentally, wrong:
Quote:
A longer data series and several corrections to the UAH method leaves the UAH series showing warming
Source: IPCC; and UAH website (http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/)

And you can see the ongoing commentary of the scientists who gathered that data (and the corrected data itself) here.

Last edited by Fuckyouformakingmeregister; 03-29-2008 at 07:17 AM.. Reason: added something about the troposphere
Old 03-29-2008, 06:51 AM Fuckyouformakingmeregister is offline  
Reply With Quote
#169  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuckyouformakingmeregister View Post
Apparently you don't get it. I just told you that leaks/sinks in the carbon cycle could remove CO2 from the atmosphere. You don't need a catastrophic event.

And I assume you agree with my assessment of your logic since you posted no defense.

where is your catastrophic change that offsets co2?
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 03-29-2008, 09:05 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#170  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuckyouformakingmeregister View Post
I guess we can chalk another one up for the secret science conspiracy theory argument.



It doesn't matter if you'd call them scientists or not. They are scientists. It's kind of funny you believe Richard Kerr, who isn't a practicing scientist, over people who have spent years studying the issues. It's also worth mentioning that I can't actually find the article where he says that - it just something anti-warming websites seem to post.

I did find this though:

Source:http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...31/smn.07.html

So apparently he does think the earth is warming.



Provide a reasonable source and then maybe this can be discussed.

EDIT: Found some info on the troposphere and your claims seem to be based on dated UAH satelitte data info, which was, incidentally, wrong:

Source: IPCC; and UAH website (http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/)

And you can see the ongoing commentary of the scientists who gathered that data (and the corrected data itself) here.


where is your catastrophic change that offsets co2?
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 03-29-2008, 09:06 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#171  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuckyouformakingmeregister View Post
Apparently you don't get it. I just told you that leaks/sinks in the carbon cycle could remove CO2 from the atmosphere. You don't need a catastrophic event.

And I assume you agree with my assessment of your logic since you posted no defense.

Leaks? Sinks? when all that co2 is STILL INCREASING for hundreds of years AFTER the earth starts cooling?



You fucking braindead soft mouth bitch

go back to school and learn about cause and effect. It may help you pull your head out of your ass
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323

Last edited by TheMorlock; 03-29-2008 at 09:24 AM..
Old 03-29-2008, 09:10 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#172  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuckyouformakingmeregister View Post
Real argument? If you paid attention I said even if we assume your unsubstantiated story about gigantic CO2 levels with million year lags in the past is true, it doesn't actually rule out the possibility that current CO2 levels are causing warming or amplifying a natural warming process.

thousand year lags

learn to read bitch

lags that that continue after the earth starts cooling bitch

If you paid attention you would not get so much cum in your eyes bitch. swallow when I tell you next time
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 03-29-2008, 09:33 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#173  

BoxyBrown
 
BoxyBrown's Avatar
 
30 years ago we were headed for an ice age. It's all about the fear campaign the media tries to put on us.
__________________
[M] GNU/Linux crew
There will be no peace as long as Zionists and niggers are alive.
DigitalMocking please don't ban me for this post.
Old 03-29-2008, 09:41 AM BoxyBrown is offline  
Reply With Quote
#174  

Fuckyouformakingmeregister
wall candy eating retard
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock View Post
where is your catastrophic change that offsets co2?

Like I said, there doesn't have to be a catastrophic change to offset CO2 levels.
Old 03-29-2008, 09:51 AM Fuckyouformakingmeregister is offline  
Reply With Quote
#175  

Fuckyouformakingmeregister
wall candy eating retard
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock View Post
Leaks? Sinks? when all that co2 is STILL INCREASING for hundreds of years AFTER the earth starts cooling?

You fucking braindead soft mouth bitch

go back to school and learn about cause and effect. It may help you pull your head out of your ass

Leaks/sinks in the carbon cycle is one of many possible ways CO2 could have fallen without the need for a catastrophie. These leaks/sinks don't have to depend on temperature or current CO2 levels. An increase in the number of plants, for instance, would drastically reduce CO2 levels.

I suggest you brush up on your critical thinking skills.

Last edited by Fuckyouformakingmeregister; 03-29-2008 at 09:58 AM..
Old 03-29-2008, 09:54 AM Fuckyouformakingmeregister is offline  
Reply With Quote
#176  

Fuckyouformakingmeregister
wall candy eating retard
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock View Post
thousand year lags

learn to read bitch

lags that that continue after the earth starts cooling bitch

If you paid attention you would not get so much cum in your eyes bitch. swallow when I tell you next time

Here you are on a tangent again. The actual length of the lags had nothing to do with my comments.

Learn to interpret arguments in an objective way.
Old 03-29-2008, 09:57 AM Fuckyouformakingmeregister is offline  
Reply With Quote
#177  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuckyouformakingmeregister View Post
Here you are on a tangent again. The actual length of the lags had nothing to do with my comments.

Learn to interpret arguments in an objective way.

OH the argument you have that co2 released by humans is magical?

that hundreds of times the amount of c02 in the atmosphere did not slow global cooling Once in millions of years?
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 03-29-2008, 11:09 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#178  

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuckyouformakingmeregister View Post
Leaks/sinks in the carbon cycle is one of many possible ways CO2 could have fallen without the need for a catastrophie. These leaks/sinks don't have to depend on temperature or current CO2 levels. An increase in the number of plants, for instance, would drastically reduce CO2 levels.

I suggest you brush up on your critical thinking skills.

It Did NOTFucking Fall you stupid fucking bitch.
It continued to climb while the earth was cooling

Learn To Fucking READ
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 03-29-2008, 11:12 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#179  

Fuckyouformakingmeregister
wall candy eating retard
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock View Post
It Did NOTFucking Fall you stupid fucking bitch.
It continued to climb while the earth was cooling

Learn To Fucking READ

Ah, you want a mechanism for how the earth would cool in the presence of high CO2. I'll borrow from what is arged to be a cause of global warming and say that a reduction in the amount of solar radiation in the past could account for that discrepany. Any number of other natural, non-catastrophic factors could also account for it.
Old 03-29-2008, 11:51 AM Fuckyouformakingmeregister is offline  
Reply With Quote
#180  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:10 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.