The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Scientists agree on Global Warming » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (191 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..37..71..105..139..170~171~172~173~174~175~176~177 [Next]
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27300 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Much simpler to argue from history, proven methods and facts. model. prediction. verification.

have you heard the reasoned/scientific sense offered by the folks who write our laws? those who would enforce our laws? and you presume to have such people (and yourself included) make comment on large-scale processes in nature? to presume to write natural law and demand others obey such?

how many biology classrooms have textbooks that teach something other than science?

kindly argue from base reality. will you turn off your own heat this winter? will you demand punishment for those who don't after you have? what will you condone as far as those populations who disagree with your position and are not interested in your claims?

talk to the other hand Smile show what you believe with what you do. let's see what happens with the keystone pipeline and our local environmental matters.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil's Island
16543 Posts

Profile of tommy
Their so called science is none falsifiable Slim and so it’s not science. You can’t prove it is wrong and so it is a waste of time trying prove Al Gore lied about it. Take this for example: Seven years ago, climate change alarmist Al Gore predicted that the North Pole could be completely liquidated by 2014 due to the impending threat of global warming. I don’t think he was largely correct in his main statements there about Global Climate Change because he was totally incorrect about that main statement for a start. Did he lie?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Pop Haydn
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles
3691 Posts

Profile of Pop Haydn
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Much simpler to argue from history, proven methods and facts. model. prediction. verification.

have you heard the reasoned/scientific sense offered by the folks who write our laws? those who would enforce our laws? and you presume to have such people (and yourself included) make comment on large-scale processes in nature? to presume to write natural law and demand others obey such?

how many biology classrooms have textbooks that teach something other than science?

kindly argue from base reality. will you turn off your own heat this winter? will you demand punishment for those who don't after you have? what will you condone as far as those populations who disagree with your position and are not interested in your claims?

talk to the other hand Smile show what you believe with what you do. let's see what happens with the keystone pipeline and our local environmental matters.


Why not stick to the subject, Jon?
mastermindreader
View Profile
1949 - 2017
Seattle, WA
12586 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Facts are facts whether one agrees with them or not.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil's Island
16543 Posts

Profile of tommy
What is fact?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27300 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Pop Haydn wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Much simpler to argue from history, proven methods and facts. model. prediction. verification.

have you heard the reasoned/scientific sense offered by the folks who write our laws? those who would enforce our laws? and you presume to have such people (and yourself included) make comment on large-scale processes in nature? to presume to write natural law and demand others obey such?

how many biology classrooms have textbooks that teach something other than science?

kindly argue from base reality. will you turn off your own heat this winter? will you demand punishment for those who don't after you have? what will you condone as far as those populations who disagree with your position and are not interested in your claims?

talk to the other hand Smile show what you believe with what you do. let's see what happens with the keystone pipeline and our local environmental matters.


Why not stick to the subject, Jon?


Whit, the 97 percent thing was exposed as media meme.

back to the real world - preferably where real people argue from something other than induced hysteria
...to all the coins I've dropped here
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil's Island
16543 Posts

Profile of tommy
The most powerful entity in our solar system is the Sun and that’s a fact, which is why our system is called the solar system, in fact, which is in fact why the ancient Egyptians symbolized the Sun as God and it is a God in fact by definition:: A god is an entity with power. Facts are facts. Payne. Gods exist.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27300 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
"end of the world" storytellers are getting trite. confidence levels in science are much lower than gas prices.

@Tommy, the guy who used to claim the moon was going to eat the sun and had the ceremony ready on the right day/time - to stand before the awed tribe to lead worship during an eclipse... at least he got the part about "show your evidence to state your case" right.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Pop Haydn
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles
3691 Posts

Profile of Pop Haydn
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Pop Haydn wrote:
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Much simpler to argue from history, proven methods and facts. model. prediction. verification.

have you heard the reasoned/scientific sense offered by the folks who write our laws? those who would enforce our laws? and you presume to have such people (and yourself included) make comment on large-scale processes in nature? to presume to write natural law and demand others obey such?

how many biology classrooms have textbooks that teach something other than science?

kindly argue from base reality. will you turn off your own heat this winter? will you demand punishment for those who don't after you have? what will you condone as far as those populations who disagree with your position and are not interested in your claims?

talk to the other hand Smile show what you believe with what you do. let's see what happens with the keystone pipeline and our local environmental matters.


Why not stick to the subject, Jon?


Whit, the 97 percent thing was exposed as media meme.

back to the real world - preferably where real people argue from something other than induced hysteria



The 97 percent thing was not exposed as a media meme.

Look at the list of scientific organizations that accept the basic tenants of man-made climate change. There are NO major scientific organizations that deny climate change.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil's Island
16543 Posts

Profile of tommy
Blessed are the basic tenants of man made climate change for they will pay the rent to the landlords eh.

What is the detail in the UN treaty by the way, you know the one, that speaks of a global government, the one which our leaders are trying keep quiet?

Lets hear that again!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEqFtVrAgSo
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27300 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Credible argumentation starts with sources
Here is the article in question: http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article

the research was discussed in detail and looked at again back in jan-march 2014 -
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014......_14.html
from the above: "This should, obviously, make us skeptical of other Cook claims, giving the name of his web site, Skeptical Science, an unintended double meaning."

then some background was published: http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/06......lan.html

something a little more telling: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1......-00091.1
fron the above "In a survey of AMS members, perceived scientific consensus was the strongest predictor
of views on global warming, followed by political ideology, climate science expertise, and perceived organizational conflict."

or to be more direct - gravy train politics and chicken little hysteria
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Pop Haydn
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles
3691 Posts

Profile of Pop Haydn
The scientific consensus does not depend on any one report:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_......onsensus
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27300 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Pop Haydn wrote:
The scientific consensus does not depend on any one report:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_......onsensus

Science is not about reports - it's about experiments and models. Committees and reports are a political instrument/product.


I get the feeling some folks wish to forget a generation of economic and political malfeasance by engaging in "end of the world" green fantasy. Would you settle for a right to be forgotten?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Pop Haydn
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles
3691 Posts

Profile of Pop Haydn
This isn't about your feelings, Jon. Why not put up some evidence that shows the vast majority of climate scientists wrong? Instead of just accusing them of fudging the data in order to make money. Where is the data fudged? How are they wrong?
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27300 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Whit - I posted a link to the OP source article. Then to an article looking at, and I believe, refuting the 97 percent claim. Then an article about the stated intents of its author documented in his own words.

What do you make of that? Talk to the data - please.

My feelings - are simple - I wonder why some folks insist on a right to be forgotten and some folks wish to be seen as do-gooders.

from one of the linked articles:
"Introduction
It's essential that the public understands that there's a scientific consensus on AGW. So Jim Powell, Dana and I have been working on something over the last few months that we hope will have a game changing impact on the public perception of consensus. Basically, we hope to establish that not only is there a consensus, there is a strengthening consensus. Deniers like to portray the myth that the consensus is crumbling, that the tide is turning. However, our survey of the peer-reviewed literature shows that the opposite is true - the consensus is getting stronger and the gap between those that accept and reject the consensus is increasing. What we have in mind is an extended campaign over 2012 (and beyond)."


The kool-aid is in the hype
...to all the coins I've dropped here
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Pop Haydn wrote:
...
Monkton is not trained in science. He has taken more than 47 million dollars from the big oil companies.
...


Pop, do you feel the need to lie to support a position or are you just mistaken? I'm afraid your claim that Monkton has received 47 million dollars from big oil is quite wrong.

I suspect your claim originated from this post by the DeSmog blog.

http://www.desmogblog.com/christopher-monckton

"Monckton presented at the Heartland Institute's Third International Conference on Climate Change.
DeSmogBlog found that the sponsors Heartland's 2009 International Conference on Climate Change had collectively received over $47 million from oil companies and right-wing foundations."

Of course, if you researched this quote half a percent as much as you research anything contrary to your beliefs you would have easily found a list of the organizations that the funding went to here.

http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-inst......sponsors

Not surprisingly, Monkton doesn't appear to be mentioned within the list.

The list does show that the list of organizations covers 54 different groups and that are spread out over as much as 20 years. In other words, peanuts when compared to the amount of money being poured into AGW groups.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil's Island
16543 Posts

Profile of tommy
Personally I wouldn't trust Monckton as far as I could throw him. That does not make him special as I only trust in God. Nature, it never lies. Consensus in science is utter nonsense in itself: 2 + 2 does not equal 4 unless there is a consensus of opinion, children. Who do you trust? Who do you believe? What a load of ********.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Slim King
View Profile
Eternal Order
Orlando
18038 Posts

Profile of Slim King
The 97% figure came from a student researchers email flyer answered by less than 80 scientists....

The Alarmists grabbed it and ran ..

This is the song that never ends........... Smile
THE MAN THE SKEPTICS REFUSE TO TEST FOR ONE MILLION DOLLARS.. The Worlds Foremost Authority on Houdini's Life after Death.....
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil's Island
16543 Posts

Profile of tommy
The Manipulation of Delphi to manufacture consensus is now so well known to conspiracy theorists, that they themselves are using it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OysW1u1GH28
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
RNK
View Profile
Inner circle
7529 Posts

Profile of RNK
Quote:
On Jan 8, 2015, Slim King wrote:
The 97% figure came from a student researchers email flyer answered by less than 80 scientists....

The Alarmists grabbed it and ran ..

This is the song that never ends........... Smile


NEVER ENDS! Amazing- the believers just seem to close their eyes when it doesn't fit their opinion. Jonathan posts articles refuting what Pop states and even asks for- but closes his eyes and doesn't address them.
Check out Bafflingbob.com
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Scientists agree on Global Warming » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (191 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..37..71..105..139..170~171~172~173~174~175~176~177 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.12 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL