Beautiful, just beautiful. I love this....
-
No but you are afraid to challenge yours, even when they have been proven to be based on a fraudulent lie.
Strawman. You took your position ("no") and applied it to him and then attacked him as if it was his position. Your attempt to win the argument through deception has been logged and noted. You currently refuse to read the information presented, are unwilling to challenge your worldview and are basing the comment of it being fradulent on incorrect data. Try again, only this time don't use a strawman argument.
-
Strawman. You took your position ("no") and applied it to him and then attacked him as if it was his position. Your attempt to win the argument through deception has been logged and noted. You currently refuse to read the information presented, are unwilling to challenge your worldview and are basing the comment of it being fradulent on incorrect data. Try again, only this time don't use a strawman argument.
The "information" he posted is an inefficient way of saying that they manipulated the data with imaginary numbers that they made up to make the data look like the earth is catastrophically warming. It is a hot load of hoarse shit. It further solidifies the fact that they manipulated the data to hide the decline.
-
No but you are afraid to challenge yours, even when they have been proven to be based on a fraudulent lie.
I understand that it's because your life in the real world is empty, that you need to try to make yourself feel good with this drivel, but I've read plenty on all sides of AGW before coming to a conclusion, one that I leave open in the face of any emerging evidence. You, on the other hand, watch the youtube videos that feed your bias, and then let it grow and fester, by hiding it from anything that might contradict it.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
The "information" he posted is an inefficient way of saying that they manipulated the data with imaginary numbers that they made up to make the data look like the earth is catastrophically warming. It is a hot load of hoarse shit. It further solidifies the fact that they manipulated the data to hide the decline.
No it is not. Strawman again. Do you like it when Business executives tell you how to code? Do they know all the ins and outs of using classes, methods and OO programming? The answer is probably "no." So where do you come from telling scientists that their methods, systems and data is made up or just plain wrong? Some laymen gets their hands on info that uses profession specific jargon and decides the term "trick" means the literal meaning of the word. And you don't question that? Cause if someone read my correspondence to another programmer I obviously mean that I should use 20+ school kids to perform a function in my program, right? Cause that is a class... I know someone in a related field. The trick is, in fact, just showing the numbers in an easy to see manned. Because laymen are idiots and need everything plotted out for them. And the whole thing with the rings was because the data stopped working right after that point. It becomes unreliable. So they drop it completely after that point. Why is it unreliable? No clue, but rather than keep faulty data, they ditch it. How do they know it is faulty? They have other data that has been verified and shown to be correct. So you make up a position for him, don't bother reading the data and explain away your easy to defeat position. That's Number 2 today.
-
The facts that come from all sorts of scientific bodies, around the world. Like I said, even if you're right and one body is discredited, that doesn't prove that every scientist who has ever said anything that disagrees with your imaginary worldview, is lying.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Also, there are 30k + scientists that actually do real peer reviewed research. Then there are the fraudulent IPCC criminals that were paid with taxpayer's money and have been proven as criminally fraudulent. Those 30k+ scientists are real scientists that work on real science. Instead you believe the fraudsters.
-
Also, there are 30k + scientists that actually do real peer reviewed research. Then there are the fraudulent IPCC criminals that were paid with taxpayer's money and have been proven as criminally fraudulent. Those 30k+ scientists are real scientists that work on real science. Instead you believe the fraudsters.
Foul, using fraudulent twice. Now put up or shut up, where are these 30K scientists? I want a list, and if I see Mickey Mouse or some other fraudulent name on there I am awarding points to the other team. In retrospect, this is actually fun.
-
Foul, using fraudulent twice. Now put up or shut up, where are these 30K scientists? I want a list, and if I see Mickey Mouse or some other fraudulent name on there I am awarding points to the other team. In retrospect, this is actually fun.
You are dishonorable and a petty fool. Google it!
-
You are dishonorable and a petty fool. Google it!
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=30K+scientists+that+disagree+with+global+warming&l=1[^] Okay I did. Now look at the "I'm feeling lucky" and ACTUALLY READ IT!
-
You are dishonorable and a petty fool. Google it!
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You are dishonorable
This isn't a death match here, no one is klingon. Because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them dishonorable.
Check out the CodeProject forum Guidelines[^] The original soapbox 1.0 is back![^]
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You are dishonorable
This isn't a death match here, no one is klingon. Because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make them dishonorable.
Check out the CodeProject forum Guidelines[^] The original soapbox 1.0 is back![^]
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with everything that is good and right.
-
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with everything that is good and right.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with everything that is good and right.
Oh, I'm starting a new blog post just for quotes like this one.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)
-
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with everything that is good and right.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with everything that is good and right.
You originally wrote
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with God.
You don't sincerely believe that to be true, do you?
Check out the CodeProject forum Guidelines[^] The original soapbox 1.0 is back![^]
-
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with everything that is good and right.
Strawman #3. You are not Jesus, God, nor everything that is good and right. Calling me dishonorable when I enlisted and spent 6 years in the armed forces and you have done JACK SHIT isn't really working for you either. Read the link yet? Cause I know like 15 people that could be on that list. Anybody with a bachelors in science could be. Heck, they probably only left out BFAs to make it look better. And I am not thinking a Dentist is an authority on climate change, FYI.
-
Disagreeing with me is like disagreeing with everything that is good and right.
How about you just unplug the computer and get back in bed with your goat
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.
-
How about you just unplug the computer and get back in bed with your goat
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.
That's a bit harsh... on the goat.
-
Strawman #3. You are not Jesus, God, nor everything that is good and right. Calling me dishonorable when I enlisted and spent 6 years in the armed forces and you have done JACK SHIT isn't really working for you either. Read the link yet? Cause I know like 15 people that could be on that list. Anybody with a bachelors in science could be. Heck, they probably only left out BFAs to make it look better. And I am not thinking a Dentist is an authority on climate change, FYI.
You are just a stupid disposable robot, doing the dirty work of evil men. Why can't you be honorable by fighting for liberty and integrity?
-
You are just a stupid disposable robot, doing the dirty work of evil men. Why can't you be honorable by fighting for liberty and integrity?
I did do that. How about you? I never bombed a home, shot a civilian nor did anything that would be called less than honorable. My integrity is MUCH better than someone who uses a list of "30k+ scientists" and doesn't even have the balls to look up the info and find out an EFFING DENTIST is on that list. What kind of person believes a group to have ANY integrity when they count a dentist as someone that has ANY right to chime in on climate change? The basis of them being scientist is having a BS in science. That means every programmer with a BS in Com Sci could sign a petition saying they believe in global warming and it would be JUST AS VALID. So please, don't talk to me about integrity or honor. You just showed you have none thinking that petition can validate your position. Which one of us can't even bother reading or seeing the info the other presents and instead resorts to calling themselves "all that is good and right" and can't even stand by their own words when quoted on it?!
-
Christian Graus wrote:
the facts make clear that there is
What facts? The facts that came from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?
The facts are available without recourse to the IPCC. If you actually studied the subject - perhaps read what scientists who deny AGW have written - you would know where to find them. Stop posting on matters about which you are ignorant. Oh. You would have to stop posting altogether.
Bob Emmett
-
No it is not. Strawman again. Do you like it when Business executives tell you how to code? Do they know all the ins and outs of using classes, methods and OO programming? The answer is probably "no." So where do you come from telling scientists that their methods, systems and data is made up or just plain wrong? Some laymen gets their hands on info that uses profession specific jargon and decides the term "trick" means the literal meaning of the word. And you don't question that? Cause if someone read my correspondence to another programmer I obviously mean that I should use 20+ school kids to perform a function in my program, right? Cause that is a class... I know someone in a related field. The trick is, in fact, just showing the numbers in an easy to see manned. Because laymen are idiots and need everything plotted out for them. And the whole thing with the rings was because the data stopped working right after that point. It becomes unreliable. So they drop it completely after that point. Why is it unreliable? No clue, but rather than keep faulty data, they ditch it. How do they know it is faulty? They have other data that has been verified and shown to be correct. So you make up a position for him, don't bother reading the data and explain away your easy to defeat position. That's Number 2 today.
-
Distind wrote:
I've skimmed a chunk and all I see is typical politics and shop talk.
They were caught manipulating the data and engaging in corrupt policies and malicious tactics to try convince the world that there is a warming trend when in reality there is cooling trend. If that is typical of scientists then we need to seriously step back and take a very serious look at what we believe as sounds science...like vaccinations for instance, or perhaps fluoride in water.