The mentality of Global Warmists
-
Here is our dear member and colleague, riced, stating that In fact I would not do so since ice ages do not cause ice caps. The existence of extensive ice caps is a feature that identifies a particular period as an ice age[^] So by analogy, a drought doesnt cause grass to die, but dead grass is a feature of drought. With logic and word play like this is it any wonder it is impossible to debate with these people?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
AS usual, you take the retarded position that the stupidest thing you can find said by anyone who 'believes in' AGW, is representative of what every person who accepts the sciences behind AGW believes. As if they have a committee and get together to discuss their position and who gets to say what in public.
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.
-
Ice caps are an EFFECT of an Ice Age, not a cause. The cause could be something like reduced solar activity, or a volcanic outflowing (see Siberian Traps), or a bolide impact. Do not put your cart before your horse. However, having an Ice Cap is a sign that you are in an Ice Age, and is quite rare. For 99% of the 4.3 Billion years the Earth has been here it has not been in an Ice Age.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
For those who don't follow the link here's the sentence in context.
In context:
You then say I have changed my point from "Global Warming causing ice caps to ICe Ages causing ice caps". I don't see anywhere that I have done so. In fact I would not do so since ice ages do not cause ice caps. The existence of extensive ice caps is a feature that identifies a particular period as an ice age. Ice ages themselves are not causes of anything, they are periods that share various features, most prominent of which is the existence of extensive ice caps.
fat_boy wrote:
So by analogy
Argument by analogy is fraught with problems. An elementary introduction to logic or philosophy would point out the perils. In this case I believe the analogy doe not hold. Finally, you cannot draw any conclusions about the mentality of 'Global Warmists' (note the plural) from statements made by one person. That's analogous to saying Christians abhor contraception because the Pope does. :)
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
-
AS usual, you take the retarded position that the stupidest thing you can find said by anyone who 'believes in' AGW, is representative of what every person who accepts the sciences behind AGW believes. As if they have a committee and get together to discuss their position and who gets to say what in public.
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.
-
And once again you start with the insults Christian. Re your thread, if you DID get autism, at least your social skills wouldnt be affected. ;P
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
ROTFL !!! You never stop with the endless tirade of crap. I just respond in kind. Your anti AGW posts are so retarded that I wonder if you're secretly pro AGW and want to infiltrate and undermine the enemy.
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.
-
ROTFL !!! You never stop with the endless tirade of crap. I just respond in kind. Your anti AGW posts are so retarded that I wonder if you're secretly pro AGW and want to infiltrate and undermine the enemy.
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.
Here we go again. In every thread where I have discussed, seriously, AGW and the science behind it, you have been notably quiet. As soon as I have a bit of an ammusing rant you start calling me either an idiot, CSS, or now, retarded (whcih is at least a refreshingly new insult). Its so obvious what you do and why you do it Christian that it surprises me that you think you can get away with it unnoticed. Do you hope the attendees of the BackRoom are less sentient?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
riced wrote:
In this case I believe the analogy doe not hold.
Despite them both being related to temperature, and its effect? Seems pretty clear to me.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
The analogy fails because you can have a drought without dead grass. You can also have dead grass without a drought. However you cannot have an ice age without extensive ice caps, and extensive ice caps mean you have an ice age.
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
-
The analogy fails because you can have a drought without dead grass. You can also have dead grass without a drought. However you cannot have an ice age without extensive ice caps, and extensive ice caps mean you have an ice age.
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
fat_boy is correct. Climate Change/Global Warming believers are part of a new cultist religion, based on manipulated science. The believers play with words, because they cannot win a debate. The believers throw our long boring nonsense, based on flawed models and statistics. If anyone else presents the complete and truly peer reviewed science the believers resort to insults on intelligence and starts dancing around trivial matters as if the believer is superior.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
fat_boy is correct. Climate Change/Global Warming believers are part of a new cultist religion, based on manipulated science. The believers play with words, because they cannot win a debate. The believers throw our long boring nonsense, based on flawed models and statistics. If anyone else presents the complete and truly peer reviewed science the believers resort to insults on intelligence and starts dancing around trivial matters as if the believer is superior.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
The believers throw our long boring nonsense, based on flawed models and statistics.
You've missed the closing clause. Something like "into the trash can with our rants that pose as reasoned argument" should do. :-D
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
-
fat_boy is correct. Climate Change/Global Warming believers are part of a new cultist religion, based on manipulated science. The believers play with words, because they cannot win a debate. The believers throw our long boring nonsense, based on flawed models and statistics. If anyone else presents the complete and truly peer reviewed science the believers resort to insults on intelligence and starts dancing around trivial matters as if the believer is superior.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
In other words, the people you believe are wise oracles and the people you reject are deliberate liars ? That is awesome.
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.
-
Here we go again. In every thread where I have discussed, seriously, AGW and the science behind it, you have been notably quiet. As soon as I have a bit of an ammusing rant you start calling me either an idiot, CSS, or now, retarded (whcih is at least a refreshingly new insult). Its so obvious what you do and why you do it Christian that it surprises me that you think you can get away with it unnoticed. Do you hope the attendees of the BackRoom are less sentient?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Its so obvious what you do and why you do it Christian that it surprises me that you think you can get away with it unnoticed.
Well, I'm sure you have amusing theories as to what I do and why.
fat_boy wrote:
Do you hope the attendees of the BackRoom are less sentient?
Actually, the back room has refilled since the great exodus, and some decent discussion does ensue. It's certainly not as closed, controlled or regimented as you and Oakman's love in.
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.