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
:ninja:
My cooter sweats, and reeks like rotting sea vermon.
 
:ninja:'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMorlock View Post
Because of course we all know that ocean acidification has not been one of the big pushes from the AGW crowd and this article is of course completely independent of that mindset . It's completely independent with no ties at all to anyone who would even think of AGW and its associated advocacy science as THE prime mover of environmental change. Especially after one after another of it's sacred cows gets blown out of the water(see what I did there?) by people no longer afraid of losing funding or positions if they dare question AGW,

Like I said, you cant be fucking serious.

You're trying too hard, hat slipping a bit?

So, I haven't really read this thread, but...


Are you suggesting that any climate research which suggests that humans are adversely affecting our surroundings is biased propaganda and lies? I just want to be clear here.

Is there something about the science in that experiment that isn't sound? Or do you just attack the credibility of the scientists directly?
__________________
Use Linux and BSD
Old 01-30-2012, 07:05 PM :ninja: is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2011  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by :ninja: View Post
So, I haven't really read this thread, but...


Are you suggesting that any climate research which suggests that humans are adversely affecting our surroundings is biased propaganda and lies? I just want to be clear here.

Is there something about the science in that experiment that isn't sound? Or do you just attack the credibility of the scientists directly?

No, just most. No, the AGW "scientists" have been caught cherry picking data. Been caught forcing people out of jobs that disagree with them. Been caught compromising the peer review process. Paper kiting.

We have a lot of real data on real threats to the environment. Overfishing, farm chemical runoff, ecofreak fuckups like MTBE that kill of river and lake life. Landfill problems.

But holes keep getting blasted in "climate change". People like gibsy keep pretending, that each case where a "Known Fact tm" of how we are affecting the global environment gets shown to be a common recurring cycle and not some human caused alteration, is just an isolated issue and not a giant caselog against the sky is falling attitude of Warmists that humans are the cause.

False claims about CO2 sequestration. False claims about what level of warming to expect from X rise in CO2. Not mistaken claims. False because deliberate efforts to discard mitigating or countering data.

Making a conclusion first and then forcing everything to fit the answer you already came up with is not science. It's religion.

You used the term adversely affecting? Thats one of the problems that warmists have, that any change is an adverse change. What is the criteria?
__________________
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 01-31-2012, 01:46 AM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2012  

[H]ard|On
tell me i is retarded and i will just potato
 
[H]ard|On's Avatar
 
Is Morecock still spouting off stupid shit like a Fox News mouth piece?
__________________
Make Genmay Great Again
Old 01-31-2012, 03:06 PM [H]ard|On is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2013  

Guess Who
 
Global warming is a load of crap.
Old 02-01-2012, 04:56 PM Guess Who is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2014  

teh scud
 
teh scud's Avatar
 
What do deniers believe is the ultimate goal of the scientists that are supposedly lying about global warming?
Old 02-01-2012, 07:58 PM teh scud is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2015  

[H]ard|On
tell me i is retarded and i will just potato
 
[H]ard|On's Avatar
 
This is the single dumbest thread on genmay and I am amazed it has 40 pages of nonsense

It's like how some people don't believe in AIDS. They say "Did you know that nobody has ever actually died of AIDS? They all die of something else!"
__________________
Make Genmay Great Again
Old 02-01-2012, 08:20 PM [H]ard|On is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2016  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by teh scud View Post
What do deniers believe is the ultimate goal of the scientists that are supposedly lying about global warming?

dat research grant money!

seriously. they think it's all a scam to "enrich" scientists.

also, a conspiracy by liberals to control every aspect of your life. just like health care.
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 02-01-2012, 08:27 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2017  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by [H]ard|On View Post
It's like how some people don't believe in AIDS. They say "Did you know that nobody has ever actually died of AIDS? They all die of something else!"

__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 02-01-2012, 08:29 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2018  

joemama
Watch Toomer burn those cowboys. How bout them cowboys?
 
joemama's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by teh scud View Post
What do deniers believe is the ultimate goal of the scientists that are supposedly lying about global warming?
I dunno, maybe you should e-mail one of these 19 scientists that were once knee deep in the alarmism. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...838421366.html

I know it make things nice and neat for you people to label anyone who questions the political and financial slant to the hysteria as "deniers"....as in don't believe that the climate is changing and everyone who says otherwise is a liar.
__________________
Rapid-fire double bass of the GenMay dru[M]mers collective

Syndrome of a Downs- drums/songwriter
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Bumfuck Egypt
.......v
Old 02-01-2012, 08:52 PM joemama is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2019  

slayerdabest
 
global warming...is tat bad?
Old 02-01-2012, 08:57 PM slayerdabest is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2020  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemama View Post
I dunno, maybe you should e-mail one of these 19 scientists that were once knee deep in the alarmism. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...838421366.html

I know it make things nice and neat for you people to label anyone who questions the political and financial slant to the hysteria as "deniers"....as in don't believe that the climate is changing and everyone who says otherwise is a liar.

what about the other 99% of scientists? are they lying?

what about the fact that most of the deniers seem to be funded by the polluters? I'm sure there's no conflict of interest there.

what about the group of deniers who did their own studies only to find that their studies agreed with the consensus that global climate change is real and happening?
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 02-01-2012, 09:17 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2021  

joemama
Watch Toomer burn those cowboys. How bout them cowboys?
 
joemama's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyramid View Post
what about the other 99% of scientists? are they lying?

what about the fact that most of the deniers seem to be funded by the polluters? I'm sure there's no conflict of interest there.

what about the group of deniers who did their own studies only to find that their studies agreed with the consensus that global climate change is real and happening?
That's exactly what I'm trying to say...you use the word "denier" and lump anyone who questions climate alarmism in with people who have political/monetary agendas on the other side of the issue. You like to cherry pick the dumb people who just think the entire thing is hogwash (which I don't) and hold them up as the standard for the other side....just like anyone who doesn't agree with all your liberal views is a "racist teabagger" or some other ridiculous moniker. Lumping everyone together in one neat little group is much easier for your mind to deal with...right?

I guess I could ask you the same question...so basically you're saying that those 19 people who signed off on that article (which I doubt you even read) are liars and have something to gain personally?
__________________
Rapid-fire double bass of the GenMay dru[M]mers collective

Syndrome of a Downs- drums/songwriter
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Bumfuck Egypt
.......v
Old 02-01-2012, 10:06 PM joemama is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2022  

Gibonius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemama View Post
I dunno, maybe you should e-mail one of these 19 scientists that were once knee deep in the alarmism. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...838421366.html

I know it make things nice and neat for you people to label anyone who questions the political and financial slant to the hysteria as "deniers"....as in don't believe that the climate is changing and everyone who says otherwise is a liar.

16, not 19. And only four of them have ever done any climate research.

That's not such a terrible article, but they wrap it up with so much douchiness that it'll get used to make a bunch of points they probably don't agree with. You'll note they don't actually say they disagree with either the Earth warming or that humans are causing it, only how concerned we ought to be.

Quote:
I guess I could ask you the same question...so basically you're saying that those 19 people who signed off on that article (which I doubt you even read) are liars and have something to gain personally?
I think most of them are pretty much irrelevant to the discussion since they're not even in the field. Their voice shouldn't be any louder than mine. The ones that do have something relevant to say can throw their voice against the literally thousands of people disagreeing with them. Why would anyone without a personal expert understanding settle on the minority opinion, except as an exercise in confirmation bias?

Also the WSJ refused to print a counter letter with 350+ scientists supporting AGW and responding to that letter. Goes against the patented WSJ narrative, I suppose.
Old 02-01-2012, 10:19 PM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2023  

joemama
Watch Toomer burn those cowboys. How bout them cowboys?
 
joemama's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post
16, not 19. And only four of them have ever done any climate research.

That's not such a terrible article, but they wrap it up with so much douchiness that it'll get used to make a bunch of points they probably don't agree with. You'll note they don't actually say they disagree with either the Earth warming or that humans are causing it, only how concerned we ought to be.
And thats EXACTLY how I feel about it......and I formed that opinion long before this article came out. I find the extreme deniers (those who have something to gain, or just blindly following a political agenda) just as deplorable as you do...but no less so than the extreme apocalypse prophets.

Also, how is this wrap-up "douchie"?

"Every candidate should support rational measures to protect and improve our environment, but it makes no sense at all to back expensive programs that divert resources from real needs and are based on alarming but untenable claims of "incontrovertible" evidence."
__________________
Rapid-fire double bass of the GenMay dru[M]mers collective

Syndrome of a Downs- drums/songwriter
._--_|\
/ииииииии\
\_.--Bumfuck Egypt
.......v

Last edited by joemama; 02-01-2012 at 10:34 PM..
Old 02-01-2012, 10:26 PM joemama is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2024  

Jack's raging erection
 
Jack's raging erection's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pyramid View Post
what about the other 99% of scientists? are they lying?

what about the fact that most of the deniers seem to be funded by the polluters? I'm sure there's no conflict of interest there.

what about the group of deniers who did their own studies only to find that their studies agreed with the consensus that global climate change is real and happening?

#OccupyScience?
__________________
My real name is Shaved Dog's Ass.
Old 02-01-2012, 10:37 PM Jack's raging erection is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2025  

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 11:05 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.