Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

j-mac said:

We've been over this...You are making assumptions you shouldn't, and clearly using false narratives....Your approach is dishonest, and dismissed.

Click to expand...

And you're approach is totally deserving of mockery.

You are the Sarah Palin of climate, with the addition of an illusion of intellectual ability, which just makes you more mockable.

I would actually argue the points, but I've done this here, and I find if I can prove A, the topic just gets shifted to B, and then C, and D, until eventually you guys keep insisting on proving A again. And your fallback is that the data is 'fudged',,, i.e. made up. If you cant trust the data, you cant trust the science. And if you cant trust the science, you cant pretend to use OTHER science to disprove the science with supposedly bad data. Its a totally ****ed up argument. And you either dont know that, or DO know it and dont care. Either way, its Palinesque.

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

Verax said:

You have no argument so you're just evading now.

Click to expand...

I'm evading? What exactly? I gave you a thoughtful reply with multiple points that you could have responded to, instead I received back a boiler plate liberal attack on something I never said, much less implied. Why don't you focus on what is said to you rather than develop an argument on what you reconstruct in your own mind?

I really have to wonder what kind of motivation a person like you has.

Click to expand...

Motivation? I have the motivation to see that the evidence presented me is unbiased, and free of political agenda if one is to call it science. What are your motivations?

If you have to resort to tactics such as this... why not just come to terms with the fact that you're wrong?

Click to expand...

Wrong about what? That I don't agree with your opinion on the matter, and that makes me wrong? I hold an opinion differing from yours, in that I believe that the warming trends are present, however, I disagree as to the immediacy of the problem. Therefore, in its base theory we can find common ground, but, in what to do about it, and how that has been politicized, we have strong, if not diametrically opposed views. Instead of focusing on what we agree on, you, and others holding your same opinions take the path of vitriol, and personal attack, even to the point of saying simply 'you're wrong'....Given that path we will never agree, and until you decide that you want to actually discuss the issue, it is really a waste of time to even reply to such a base attack as you offer.

Good day to you.

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

Threegoofs said:

And you're approach is totally deserving of mockery.

You are the Sarah Palin of climate, with the addition of an illusion of intellectual ability, which just makes you more mockable.

I would actually argue the points, but I've done this here, and I find if I can prove A, the topic just gets shifted to B, and then C, and D, until eventually you guys keep insisting on proving A again. And your fallback is that the data is 'fudged',,, i.e. made up. If you cant trust the data, you cant trust the science. And if you cant trust the science, you cant pretend to use OTHER science to disprove the science with supposedly bad data. Its a totally ****ed up argument. And you either dont know that, or DO know it and dont care. Either way, its Palinesque.

Click to expand...

That is a silly position, and a fallacy....I accept your concession.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

j-mac said:

Oh my....:doh There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Click to expand...

Well, that does apply to you. I won't argue that. But what I said was correct.

What the hell does that even mean?

Click to expand...

Not sure what you don't understand. nonsensical means that you're not making any sense. The consensus is so large, that a few being discredited wouldn't have any effect at all. This is all pretty clear (though remember that you really haven't discredited any).

Rational to what? Groupthink? Good grief Joe....If your so called consensus was so huge, and the opposition to what you want so badly to be true, so small, then tell me why isn't there everything you want to see as helpful to what you think would work, in place? Why are you having so much trouble putting in place your agenda?

Because it's BS, and people see that.

Click to expand...

Groupthink doesn't mean you can't ever eventually reach a conclusion. It means that you haven't consider all options, usually applying to issues where there are multiple options, not math and science. You don't often ask your accountant for multiple opinions on whether your books balance. You merely find an expert in accounting.

As for agenda, I have no agenda. None. I only note that the science is the science. Politicians have to make decisions. Your side has an agenda of making sure the decisions you don't like aren't considered. So, like tobacco companies did, the best tactic at stopping consideration is to cloud the issue. It's a common tactic. But they rely on people accepting the BS.

The science, represented by an overwhelming majority of scientist and science organizations fall clearly on the side that made has contributed to global warming. Now, you can say we don't care, we will live with the consequences, and that's another argument. But it's factually untrue to say science hasn't reached a conclusion on this.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Lord of Planar said:

And no matter what I show you, if you choose not to trust my integrity, it doesn't matter. I've been down this road before with people. Any evidence I attempt to show you of my intelligence and knowledge, you will just accuse me to "googling" it.

Click to expand...

You have nothing that proves you to be what you say you are. And you're responses are no better than the other novices here. We can clearly link the organizations and scientists who say you're wrong. They overwhelmingly out number the outliners. This is just a fact.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

You have nothing that proves you to be what you say you are. And you're responses are no better than the other novices here. We can clearly link the organizations and scientists who say you're wrong. They overwhelmingly out number the outliners. This is just a fact.

Click to expand...

But he PROVED AGW isnt real! Swear to god. I saw the w/m2 calculations. Simple arithmetic. The dudes a genius, and through some twist of fate, when into repairing machines instead of analyzing the data that actually comes out of them. But the cabal is going to prevent his proofs from getting published in scientific journals, because they are so earth shaking, they cant allow that information to get out (except on blogs).

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

j-mac said:

I'm evading? What exactly? I gave you a thoughtful reply with multiple points that you could have responded to, instead I received back a boiler plate liberal attack on something I never said, much less implied. Why don't you focus on what is said to you rather than develop an argument on what you reconstruct in your own mind?



Motivation? I have the motivation to see that the evidence presented me is unbiased, and free of political agenda if one is to call it science. What are your motivations?



Wrong about what? That I don't agree with your opinion on the matter, and that makes me wrong? I hold an opinion differing from yours, in that I believe that the warming trends are present, however, I disagree as to the immediacy of the problem. Therefore, in its base theory we can find common ground, but, in what to do about it, and how that has been politicized, we have strong, if not diametrically opposed views. Instead of focusing on what we agree on, you, and others holding your same opinions take the path of vitriol, and personal attack, even to the point of saying simply 'you're wrong'....Given that path we will never agree, and until you decide that you want to actually discuss the issue, it is really a waste of time to even reply to such a base attack as you offer.

Good day to you.

Click to expand...

Oooh you make it sound so thoughtful and intelligent. How do you gussy up an argument of "the science isn't there" into this gem? You have to be paid to do this because you are too well spoken to just be an ignorant fool.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

Well, that does apply to you. I won't argue that. But what I said was correct.



Not sure what you don't understand. nonsensical means that you're not making any sense. The consensus is so large, that a few being discredited wouldn't have any effect at all. This is all pretty clear (though remember that you really haven't discredited any).




Groupthink doesn't mean you can't ever eventually reach a conclusion. It means that you haven't consider all options, usually applying to issues where there are multiple options, not math and science. You don't often ask your accountant for multiple opinions on whether your books balance. You merely find an expert in accounting.

As for agenda, I have no agenda. None. I only note that the science is the science. Politicians have to make decisions. Your side has an agenda of making sure the decisions you don't like aren't considered. So, like tobacco companies did, the best tactic at stopping consideration is to cloud the issue. It's a common tactic. But they rely on people accepting the BS.

The science, represented by an overwhelming majority of scientist and science organizations fall clearly on the side that made has contributed to global warming. Now, you can say we don't care, we will live with the consequences, and that's another argument. But it's factually untrue to say science hasn't reached a conclusion on this.

Click to expand...

"We are far down the road leading to the politicization of every aspect of life. A partial list of examples would include language, science, health care, climate, food, cars, sports, education, the military, and sexual orientation. Why is this happening? Why does the left want to politicize everything?
What it means to politicize something? Although not synonymous, politics and government are essentially two sides of the same coin. The dictionary defines “political” as “of or relating to government.” Liberals love government and want it to grow as much as possible. Politicizing something is an important element in expanding the reach and scope of government.
The political environment is the favorite field of battle for the left. It is their home field, their arena of choice. Liberals are much more adept at the game of politics than are conservatives. Liberals love politics far more than conservatives do. Liberals want politics maximized, conservatives want politics minimized.
Politicizing is what the left does. It’s who they are. The politicization process is essentially bringing the world into conformity with their vision of how the world ought to be and how people ought to behave. Politicization is essentially the application of conformity, intimidation, and force.
Allowing government to take charge of something is an act of centralization. It is a process of transferring power and choice from individuals to politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Michael Bloomberg. It is a reduction in variety and an increase of uniformity and one-size-fits-all. What liberals really want is not equality and fairness, it is uniformity. Obamacare is about making sure everyone has the same health care rather than making sure they have better health care."

The American Spectator : The Politicization Crusade

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

j-mac said:

"We are far down the road leading to the politicization of every aspect of life. A partial list of examples would include language, science, health care, climate, food, cars, sports, education, the military, and sexual orientation. Why is this happening? Why does the left want to politicize everything?
What it means to politicize something? Although not synonymous, politics and government are essentially two sides of the same coin. The dictionary defines “political” as “of or relating to government.” Liberals love government and want it to grow as much as possible. Politicizing something is an important element in expanding the reach and scope of government.
The political environment is the favorite field of battle for the left. It is their home field, their arena of choice. Liberals are much more adept at the game of politics than are conservatives. Liberals love politics far more than conservatives do. Liberals want politics maximized, conservatives want politics minimized.
Politicizing is what the left does. It’s who they are. The politicization process is essentially bringing the world into conformity with their vision of how the world ought to be and how people ought to behave. Politicization is essentially the application of conformity, intimidation, and force.
Allowing government to take charge of something is an act of centralization. It is a process of transferring power and choice from individuals to politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Michael Bloomberg. It is a reduction in variety and an increase of uniformity and one-size-fits-all. What liberals really want is not equality and fairness, it is uniformity. Obamacare is about making sure everyone has the same health care rather than making sure they have better health care."

The American Spectator : The Politicization Crusade

Click to expand...

yes, yes, another us versus them article. I get it. You fear THEM. But these partisan hack job articles are the problem. They are not informative. They are almost always inaccurate. They serve no real purpose other than to help the faithful form at the mouth. Don't worry, there are similar articles on the left. But none of them are worth even reading for any reason other than comic value.

:coffeepap

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

yes, yes, another us versus them article. I get it. You fear THEM. But these partisan hack job articles are the problem. They are not informative. They are almost always inaccurate. They serve no real purpose other than to help the faithful form at the mouth. Don't worry, there are similar articles on the left. But none of them are worth even reading for any reason other than comic value.

:coffeepap

Click to expand...

It's an opinion :shrug: But it further highlights how closed minded you are to opposing viewpoints, and intolerant to those views when they don't agree 100% with your own dogma.....You just further validate my point.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

j-mac said:

It's an opinion :shrug: But it further highlights how closed minded you are to opposing viewpoints, and intolerant to those views when they don't agree 100% with your own dogma.....You just further validate my point.

Click to expand...

Opinions are not created equal. By brother (you don't know him, but he's an idiot) believes the government has put chips in our rears. It's an opinion, but hardly one worth taking serious.

You should understand that I've read most of these before. And there is little difference between one written today, than a year ago, than 5 years ago, than 10 years ago. They all are merely going off on how bad the THEM is. Such opinions lack any real thought. Like I said, they're just meant to pump up the faithful. They have no ability, nor intent to convince anyone outside the faithful. It's just rabid propaganda. Nothing more.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

Opinions are not created equal. By brother (you don't know him, but he's an idiot) believes the government has put chips in our rears. It's an opinion, but hardly one worth taking serious.

You should understand that I've read most of these before. And there is little difference between one written today, than a year ago, than 5 years ago, than 10 years ago. They all are merely going off on how bad the THEM is. Such opinions lack any real thought. Like I said, they're just meant to pump up the faithful. They have no ability, nor intent to convince anyone outside the faithful. It's just rabid propaganda. Nothing more.

Click to expand...

Apply this to your own opinions, and we could have a starting point for discussion. Other than that, it is just your same silly tactic.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

j-mac said:

Apply this to your own opinions, and we could have a starting point for discussion. Other than that, it is just your same silly tactic.

Click to expand...

J, it's not a tactic. I'm trying to get you to see the larger picture. I say the same thing concerning the left. These types of US versus THEM pieces are not doing us a service. I wish you could see that.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

J, it's not a tactic. I'm trying to get you to see the larger picture. I say the same thing concerning the left. These types of US versus THEM pieces are not doing us a service. I wish you could see that.

Click to expand...

Then quit approaching it so....You play this game too Joe.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

j-mac said:

Then quit approaching it so....You play this game too Joe.

Click to expand...

J, there's no game. You are just projecting that. I'm talking straight to you. I've explained it clearly. Any us versus them article is the problem. Such an article is not enlightening in any way. That's straightforward. There's no game to it.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

The the two of you should read through the thread. It's there. I answered his question and showed him the organizations who said just that. You can be honest or serious if you keep saying you didn't get it.

Click to expand...

There is no scientific organization that has classified AGW as a Scientific Theory.

Can you even cite a real live scientist, one individual, who has done so?

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

The questions was organizations that support man playing a role in GW. I used this one among others earlier:

Climate Change: Consensus

And this one.

Scientific Consensus on Global Warming | Union of Concerned Scientists


You can get an overview here:

Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

I do appreciate you doing the leg work. I have done it, too.

By the by, you're 0 for 3. No mention of the notion of AGW being a Scientific Theory in any of those links that i could find.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Lord of Planar said:

That's it?

"man playing a roll?"

That's a yes. Surely that's not what the argument is about. There has to be more than that. Please elaborate and quote the relavant parts.

I also noticed you linked all that material and didn't quote the relevant parts that support what you mean. That is not cool at all.

Click to expand...

He never does. It's like posting a link to the Library of Congress and claiming, "It's in there."

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

He asked for groups that supported the theory that man plays a role. That's what he got. You can't say man has some effect, but that no one believes they do. That's asinine.

Click to expand...

If you are talking about me, I asked for any scientific organization that has classified AGW as a Scientific Theory.

Lacking that, Any scientific organization that has proposed a test to falsify the notion.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

code1211 said:

If you are talking about me, I asked for any scientific organization that has classified AGW as a Scientific Theory.

Lacking that, Any scientific organization that has proposed a test to falsify the notion.

Click to expand...

Good luck getting that research published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Re: UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Boo Radley said:

The point is, scientists do science. Not me. Not you. Not political sites. Scientists. So, the best information is from the scientists. Not me. Not you. Not code or j or any novice on any political site. So the scientific consensus represents the science as it is the people who did the science, who reviewed the science, who fully understand the science. Not random novices just answering a poll.

That's the difference.

Click to expand...

Science normally can justify its predictions with accurate results. AGW cannot.

When a scientists proposes an if-then relationship in physical occurrences and the "then" does not occur after the "if" has occurred as specified, there is something wrong with the science.

If the scientist cannot see this or refuses to accept what is actually happening, then there is something wrong with the scientist as well.

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

Threegoofs said:

Just wait. Code will only accept it if the organization uses the word 'theory', although if you find it, he will probably insist that it should be Capitalized.

They think someone actually declares things 'Theory' officially, apparently.

Click to expand...

So far you haven't found the word in upper case, lower case or English.

Feel free to continue the search, though.

Words mean things. If it was a Theory or even a hypothesis, that would be different than it is. The way it is, it is a notion based on a fleeting idea that cannot be proven and cannot be demonstrated in the real world.

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

Verax said:

Wow. 113 pages and the deniers are still pretending the science isn't there. If a massive private industry found it necessary to declare the sky green you can bet there would be 113 pages of right-wing "there is no proof the sky is blue, it is actually green".

Click to expand...

All one need do to prove the sky is blue is to look at it.

All one need to do with AGW is prove the world will do what the AGW Diehards say it will. When the proposition is if-then and the "then" only happens once in a while, you have plenty of room for the missing proof.

You are free to start filling in the blanks.

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

j-mac said:

No, the argument has been clear. Regardless of your attempt here to slander, mock, and dismiss that argument only shows that instead of giving a rational argument, you know you have lost, you are resorting to droll tactics of leftist generally seen when they can not win the argument.

Click to expand...

The argument for UFO's is also clear. They are both very similar. Both Clear. Both unfounded. Both wrong.

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global ...

Threegoofs said:

Not really.

At some point, mocking becomes a totally acceptable response when the opponents basic stance becomes outright ludicrous.

Love the 'leftist' crack though. It's a scientific issue and somehow you guys come at it from a political viewpoint, although you pretend it's from a scientific one. But sometimes you let your real viewpoint slip out.

Click to expand...

Have you found that 39 year old temperature prediction based on AGW "Science" that is accurate?

Here are 73 that are not.


View attachment 67153160