Is news coverage of stories global?
-
You piece of shit Climate Cultists need to be stripped of your humanity and repeatedly whipped with an electric jellyfish whip by s snarling crowd.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
-
Don't bother. A more self assured pompous ignoramus is hard to find. I advise you to not spend any time arguing with him, as it'll only drain your energy for no good. He's like a hard core religious guy - no matter what you say, he'll always find some obscure scripture passage that "proves" his case. If you ask him the whole picture, you won't get any response other than "GW is a hoax, because I don't even want to begin to take any responsibility for anything".
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
fat_boy wrote:
So, the theory of AGW is UNOPROVED, that makes is false
Look, if you can't grasp such a simple concept as "Unknown," then I don't see the point in continuing this argument. AGW may be true, or it may not be. We don't have conclusive enough evidence to determine this. Therefore, it's unknown. Unproven = Not proven to be true Disproven = Proven to be false It is unproven, not disproven. EDIT: It's past 4am... I just got back from partying all night, so I'm not going to try to keep my brain awake long enough to refute your repetitive posts. If you show some common sense in your next reply, MAYBE we can continue this discussion. Otherwise, I'm tempted to lump you in the same category as CSS, like so many others seem to have done.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)Ian Shlasko wrote:
Look, if you can't grasp such a simple concept as "Unknown,"
This is what I wrote: "we still dont know what drives the climate so more research should be done." I think thats a prety clear statement that the mechanism of the climate is unknown.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
We don't have conclusive enough evidence to determine this. Therefore, it's unknown.
Is the proof you are looking for 1, real world, or 2, computer model? If its real world then how much more data do you want? 1) Another cooling cycle like the last 4 in the last century and a half? 2) Continuing coolng of large parts of the southern hemisphere? If its computer model based proof you want then lets just end the conversation here. In my opinion there is sufficient data available already from the real woprld to disprove the theory of AGW. Of course, a lot depends on how yuo define that theory. Possibles are: 1) World going to hell in a hand cart because of CO2. 2) Some warming caused by CO2 but not gong to have any negative efect. 3) No warminf at all, or warming so slight it canrt be measured agasinst natural variation. Currently I am split between #2 and #3 as being the truth. And if so, then the pressure is off and we dont need to continue pumping millions of dollars into AGW research, we can just go back to normal scientific study. What IS true is that #1 has been the position taken by the media and many scientists, and has been entirely disproved by planet earth. And hope the partying was good!
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
I never realised you were such a dick Jorgen. Thats sad. I used to think yuo were capable of some kind of reasoned debate.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
I'm calling it as I see it. Every age has whiners like you. But you know what? They end up as foot notes in history books.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
I'm calling it as I see it. Every age has whiners like you. But you know what? They end up as foot notes in history books.
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
I'm calling it as I see it. Every age has whiners like you. But you know what? They end up as foot notes in history books.
Yes, as YOU see it. Which is a very subjective view point. As for whining, well, you are just plain wrong. This isnt a whining thread, its a discussion, and quite an interesting one. Ian has directed me towards some interesting research that I will take a good look at. So why do you use whining? Well, its obviously a weak insult. Which says more about you than about me. As for being a foot note in history, if I ever acchieved that much I would be surprised.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription