Greta

random

Super Anarchist
6,057
365
boatcat65 said:
Ah, the well reasoned response from the left.  Show me some data, not just your lack of understanding, inarticulate profanity, ad hominin attacks, etc.  Your response is a perfect example of why these discussions rarely move forward.  It seems you're married to an ideology, not the truth.  Or you would use the truth to support your position.
This is who pays the guy you quote.

Heartland Institute


Background


The Heartland Institute is a Chicago-based free market think tank and 501(c)(3) charity that has been at the forefront of denying the scientific evidence for man-made climate change. The Heartland Institute has received at least $676,500 from ExxonMobil since 1998 but no longer discloses its funding sources. The Union of Concerned Scientists found (PDF) that “Nearly 40% of the total funds that the Heartland Institute has received from ExxonMobil since 1998 were specifically designated for climate change projects.” [1]

He is a shill, you are just a stupid cunt.

 

Upp3

Anarchist
697
254
boatcat65 said:
Actually....looking at the only really reliable data available- satellite scans- the temps have been falling, and are expected to fall significantly further over the next couple of years.  The good news is this debate should resolve within 5-10 years as confirming data for this theory becomes available.  The bad news is we'll get cooling, not warming.  Warming isn't nearly the threat cooling presents.  But that's another debate... 
How cold do you think it will get? As cold as in 1950's? What were the problems then?

 

random

Super Anarchist
6,057
365
Try the ignore feature? For your mental health avoid random thoughts or posts.
I have just one word for you ranger ... Vietnam.

JackNicholson.jpg


 

random

Super Anarchist
6,057
365
boatcat65 said:

This bastard is truly stupid, only quotes from climate denial Exxon funded sites.



Transcendental Medication




Read time: 1 min

By James Hoggan • Friday, December 2, 2005 - 07:15



The on-line Investors.com, puts the lie to the notion that investors are long-term thinkers with a piece entitled The EU’s Global Warming Fantasy. The article hammers away at Europe for having tried, but so far failed, to meet its Kyoto commitments. Much better the American way to not try at all.

If you start reading this piece looking for a cogent argument on what will happen if everyone takes the American path, you’ll be disappointed. But it’s worth forging on to the columnist’s last line: “The U.S. doesn’t need to ‘sign on’ to a new Kyoto deal — especially if, through technology and common sense, it can transcend it.”

Ah, there’s our answer: The Rapture






 

Upp3

Anarchist
697
254
boatcat65 said:
Here's a major difference between the two of us:  I'm all about the data- you're about the messenger and the position you've chosen to defend....no matter what.  I don't care if it's Greta or the head of NASA that carries the message- I want to see what the facts are.  Facts are relatively incontrovertible.  The messenger is unimportant- there is nothing so farcical as a partisan trying to distract from "inconvenient truths" by slamming the messenger while completely ignoring the message.  You've revealed all we need to know about your intellectual capabilities along with intent- facts don't matter, as apparently neither does your credibility.
 Would you say that it is a fact that the last couple of years drop in temperature is record breaking?

 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
28,412
3,839
 Would you say that it is a fact that the last couple of years drop in temperature is record breaking?
No because the planet is warming with the last several years being the hottest on record. Was it colder at your house? Did you try adjusting your thermostat?

 

Upp3

Anarchist
697
254
boatcat65 said:
Those are land surface temps- without getting into the specifics I'll just say that all of that data is now so corrupted by "corrections," "adjustments," and at times

outright manipulations that it's value is significantly reduced.
Do we read different pages? "GLOBAL LAND-OCEAN TEMPERATURE INDEX", why they mention ocean when talking about land surface temperatures?

Does other than land surface temperatures affect the crops?

 

Upp3

Anarchist
697
254
No because the planet is warming with the last several years being the hottest on record. Was it colder at your house? Did you try adjusting your thermostat?
Nope and nope, but boatcat65's link said that temperature drop during last couple of years was record breaking. I thought that I saw larger drops in NASA's graph and thus suspected that I got fed a source that plainly lied. Thus I would like to hear boatcat's take on that record or "record".

 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
28,412
3,839
Nope and nope, but boatcat65's link said that temperature drop during last couple of years was record breaking. I thought that I saw larger drops in NASA's graph and thus suspected that I got fed a source that plainly lied. Thus I would like to hear boatcat's take on that record or "record".
There are many many sites providing "data" about the climate - many are funded by folks like the KOCH brothers - Heartland for instance.

Of course you could just visit https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature

Warning - makes arguing about the planet warming kind of a time waste.

 

random

Super Anarchist
6,057
365
Thanks for proving my point dickhead
Thanks for proving you don't follow your own advice and you don't have me on ignore.

We can disagree on key issues but you have lowered your otherwise high standards here with personal denigration.

 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
28,412
3,839
Thanks for proving you don't follow your own advice and you don't have me on ignore.

We can disagree on key issues but you have lowered your otherwise high standards here with personal denigration.
When did I say you were on ignore? Here is an idea, lighten the fuck up Francis and try presenting your arguments without large fonts screaming that posters are paid shills. You create more havoc than any data you present and turn people off with your angry rhetoric. Want to lash out at me? Well, sort of proves the point now doesn't it.

You are a smart guy, figure it out.

 

d'ranger

Super Anarchist
28,412
3,839
boatcat65 said:
Just one of many examples.  GIGO

"the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html
Awesome, an op-ed written about an article authored by a retired accountant.  Did you run out of geologists?  Say, I may need some shoulder surgery, could you recommend a  good plumber?

 

Panoramix

Super Anarchist
boatcat65 said:
Actually....looking at the only really reliable data available- satellite scans- the temps have been falling, and are expected to fall significantly further over the next couple of years.  The good news is this debate should resolve within 5-10 years as confirming data for this theory becomes available.  The bad news is we'll get cooling, not warming.  Warming isn't nearly the threat cooling presents.  But that's another debate... 
That's not in line with current evidence as far as I know.

Can you provide evidence?

I am well aware that this scientific matter has been politicized in the USA, so please don't provide link to political organization or non scientific paper.

 

random

Super Anarchist
6,057
365
When did I say you were on ignore? Here is an idea, lighten the fuck up Francis and try presenting your arguments without large fonts screaming that posters are paid shills. You create more havoc than any data you present and turn people off with your angry rhetoric. Want to lash out at me? Well, sort of proves the point now doesn't it.

You are a smart guy, figure it out.
So we have a country that has had it's democracy hi-jacked by social media and a disinformation industry, and we have people here refusing to conceded that that industry extends to political threads here?  Really?

I call it as I see it.  It's time to get angry.  The alternative is your example, chatter with no result.  Further, attacking people who are speaking out loudly.

Lash out?  Lash fucking out?  Link me where I called you a PITA.  Good luck with that.  You can't even get that part the right way around.

 

random

Super Anarchist
6,057
365
He's using Breitbart as a source of information on climate change. Whaddya think?
The plot here thickens.  Rafts full of new anti-science socks/shills with fuck all posts with accounts created over a decade ago?

How does this work?

image.png

 
Top