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
Tex Arcana
I am a mean disrespectful person hiding anonymously and need an attitude adjustment.
 
Tex Arcana's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlisterDick View Post
your mom was WRONG

Yes, she said your dick was tasty
__________________
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.--V


Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call destiny.
--John Hobbs


~~~ ~~~ Tea[m] Pyratex ~~~ ~~~
Old 02-19-2013, 10:49 PM Tex Arcana is offline  
Reply With Quote
#121  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Straw Man
RuHo
And my head I'd be scratchin' while my thoughts were busy hatchin; If I only had a brain......
 
Straw Man's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
Idiocy 101: RuWhore shows how syphillis can damage a brain beyond all recognition

"think of all the plants ...no co2 put out by humans ....means destruction"
-you, essentially the dumbest person in this fucking forum

At least I could contract syphilis accidentally, you're fat and lonely and the closest you'll come to anything sexually transmittable is watching your mom get the clap while she turns tricks
__________________
"dogs came to man to make friends and help us hunt and guard unlike pigs"
-lolergay
Old 02-20-2013, 12:50 AM Straw Man is offline  
Reply With Quote
#122  

Gibonius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamFarber View Post
Asking "climate scientists" who look to retire on creating hysteria about boogeyman global warming is like asking Phrenologists about the validity of Phrenology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamFarber View Post
Again, scientists can't say if coffee is good for bad for you. You expect them to know about something as vast and unmeasurable as this?
Scientists are bad at science, according to a guy who doesn't know anything about the topic at hand!

Quote:
Especially when they have a VESTED INTEREST in saying there is a "crisis" so they get more money? That is truly naive.
Again ironic in light of the OP.

Quite the conspiracy though. Really thorough work coordinating this whole thing. For...grant money. Quite the motive to run a multinational conspiracy and produce elaborately collaborated fake data, you know, to get more grants so you can...do more work on fake science.
Old 02-20-2013, 07:39 AM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#123  

Gibonius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex Arcana View Post
My issue with co2 is that it's an important part of the balance because of plants and their ability to create oxygen with it. More co2 will actually encourage more plant growth (I *think* that was proven a long time ago), and the extra plant growth will help clear the excess out--note I said "help", it's not 100% and I recognize there's no way it can be otherwise.
That's like one tiny little piece of the puzzle. It's been considered, especially expanded borreal forest growth in the north, but it's fairly small. I believe it's almost entirely offset by loses in biomass as the oceans become more acidic (which is already starting to happen).

Quote:
But, until we find better ways to power our stuff that doesn't involve fossil fuels, it's gonna be awhile yet. We might be okay, if we can stomp the corprats into playing ball, but that'll take some serious regulation and enforcement.
That's part of the whole "take action because of global warming" thing that you seem opposed to. Also part of the "conspiracy" Sam keeps going to the well on, since we need more R&D funding to really develop out the alternative energies that we need to replace fossil fuels.
Quote:
Corrupted science: you already provided proof, of a study that was supposed to be biased the other way, but backfired, thankfully because someone there had some integrity.
That's an example of how the science isn't corrupted. It's not a coincidence that their results came right in line with the commonly held positions: most work was done honestly and without bias.
Quote:
The Forbes article posted earlier was another example against the Eco-people; so (based on the "smoke/fire principle), we have clear indications that shit is being manipulated to fit what the groups want them to be---and it's on both sides of the issue.
Read the link I posted about that one, it's not evidence against global warming. It's just an example of Forbes practicing bad journalism to push an agenda.
Quote:
I really don't have anything at all against cleaning up after ourselves, it's just good sense, both for us now and our descendants later. I just don't like alarmists using scare tactics on the issues (you know, like the republicans after 911) to ramrod something through they don't entirely understand, ESPECIALLY if their conclusions are based upon flawed or biased research.
I think the problem with this is that you're just defaulting to inaction, which gives the denial groups the victory. We saw the same thing play out with CFCs, the industry groups said the science was bad, they were are "environuts" etc etc. The science was right, the industry people were wrong, and we were right to ban CFCs.

Now, we again have a scientific consensus and the denial groups are shouting loudly to muddy the waters. And yes, some enviro groups are going too far. That's not (to me) a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Quote:
Oh, one other point: waaaaaaayyyy back when, after a trip in Sherman and Peabody's Way-Back-Machine, when I was reading Scientific American for fun, there was a very important article about a climate researcher who was setting off shitbombs in the climate pond, with hard data and an interesting set of conclusions: that not only are the temps not rising, both on the ground and in the troposphere; they are FALLING, and a heckuva lot faster that anyone realized. He did his measurements AWAY from populations, away from airports (where NWS takes theirs), away from any form of man-made structures. And his average temps were a couple-three deg F lower than the average. And his tropospheric measurements were bearing that out.

And, of course, the Eco-nazis of the time were decrying and shunning him, to the point where they made him a pariah. (gee, where have we heard THAT before??) even the corpowhores weren't liking him, because he was saying that some of the cooling was being accelerated by industry (smoke=haze=heat reflected back out, iirc), which pissed them off as well. And don't ask me to find it, it was nearly 20 years ago.
Don't really have any way to respond to this, other than by saying that we've been measuring temperature away from urban areas for a long time. Certainly possible that one guy got anomalous readings, but no particular reason to believe his over others without seeing the details.
Old 02-20-2013, 07:55 AM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#124  

SamFarber
 
SamFarber's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post
Scientists are bad at science, according to a guy who doesn't know anything about the topic at hand!


Again ironic in light of the OP.

Quite the conspiracy though. Really thorough work coordinating this whole thing. For...grant money. Quite the motive to run a multinational conspiracy and produce elaborately collaborated fake data, you know, to get more grants so you can...do more work on fake science.


Not so elaborately collaborated - like when they were emailing each other about hiding the contradictory evidence. DOH!
Old 02-20-2013, 05:20 PM SamFarber is offline  
Reply With Quote
#125  

Gibonius
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamFarber View Post
Not so elaborately collaborated - like when they were emailing each other about hiding the contradictory evidence. DOH!

Two points:

You could throw out all the CRU data and it wouldn't change anything, NOAA, NASA, and others have their own datasets which show the same things.

No inconsistencies were actually found in their data or scientific practices. Some of their emails sounded nasty and certainly shows that scientists are human. But, if you actually examine the data and the full email chain (instead of just pulling bits and pieces), it was ethically aboveboard. There was a whole independent inquiry into it all.

Long article about it all.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Peer-review-process.htm


Obviously you can work the inquiry into your conspiracy so this isn't going to convince you. But again, you're talking about a global conspiracy. You've got good company, Morlock was all over that!
Old 02-20-2013, 06:41 PM Gibonius is offline  
Reply With Quote
#126  

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 02:56 AM.



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