• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Global Warming Expedition Stopped In Its Tracks By Arctic Sea Ice

Tim the plumber said:
Year, that's the sort of peer reviewed stuff they had been looking at rather than the photos from space of the ice.

The theory says it's free of ice so you can sail across it. No matter what the conditions are the theory is superiour!!
Click to expand...

Weather is weather. These guys understand that. Some right-wingers seem to forget it when it suits them.
 
Buzz said:
Ya know what Renae?... I don't think I have seen you actually make a sound science and/or logic based argument on this server since I started coming here. Nope... nothing but lame attacks, denialist talking points, straw men arguments and other assorted logical fallacies.
Click to expand...

We both got called out, only one of us rose to the challenge. You were saying again about my lack of scientific acumen in the field?
 
Renae said:
We both got called out, only one of us rose to the challenge. You were saying again about my lack of scientific acumen in the field?
Click to expand...

You do attack straw men over and over when it comes to climate change.
 
Renae said:
We both got called out, only one of us rose to the challenge. You were saying again about my lack of scientific acumen in the field?
Click to expand...

I believe he was discussing your scientific contribution on the board.

And as much as you pride yourself in knowing the field, the fact remains that you have a high school education with technical training in the field.
 
Threegoofs said:
I believe he was discussing your scientific contribution on the board.

And as much as you pride yourself in knowing the field, the fact remains that you have a high school education with technical training in the field.
Click to expand...

Oh look, it's the guy who constantly insults those with education, experience, training in the field of meteorological sciences because they are "Just trained high school grads who know how to read a few instruments". All the while his experience is in chest pounding that he read from an "Authoritative source" thus making him more "knowledgable" then the "high school diploma holder who can read a few instruments".

I'm tired of you threegoofs. I really am. You are condescending, insulting and wrong. An Aerographer's Mate doesn't just "read instruments". Sure, when you're an AGAN at your first duty station, you're taking Obs every hour, maintaining logs and equipment and studying. When I got out I was a CERTIFIED Forecast Duty Officer. That means I pulled the charts, read the models, drew my own charts... by hand if Chief was being a prick and demanding we do so (it's VERY time consuming). It means I was trained in weather, climate, atmospheric sciences. I'm Nexrad trained, and been through advanced Satellite interpretation school.

I have forgotten MORE about the science of Meteorology than you'll ever comprehend.

Yes,k I DISAGREE with the consensus. So did pretty much everyone I know. One retired Chief I know, he and I go back and forth, he's a believer in AGW. He's one chief.

I've been to seminars with very smart people, got to sit down and talk with the likes of Dr. Gray out of Colorado back in the day. They didn't buy the AGW non-sense. Neither do I.

That I disagree isn't a matter of DENIAL, it's a matter of seeing the evidence, and finding a different conclusion based on my knowledge, judgement and experience.

You haven't the decency to even acknowledge the possibility that those that disagree with your position might just be doing so from an honest, intelligent position.

You just attack, and talk down to, and insult. Frankly, I've had about enough of you and your AGW crowd. You aren't about the science, you are about the POLITICS.

Deal with that.
 
Renae said:
Oh look, it's the guy who constantly insults those with education, experience, training in the field of meteorological sciences because they are "Just trained high school grads who know how to read a few instruments". All the while his experience is in chest pounding that he read from an "Authoritative source" thus making him more "knowledgable" then the "high school diploma holder who can read a few instruments".

I'm tired of you threegoofs. I really am. You are condescending, insulting and wrong. An Aerographer's Mate doesn't just "read instruments". Sure, when you're an AGAN at your first duty station, you're taking Obs every hour, maintaining logs and equipment and studying. When I got out I was a CERTIFIED Forecast Duty Officer. That means I pulled the charts, read the models, drew my own charts... by hand if Chief was being a prick and demanding we do so (it's VERY time consuming). It means I was trained in weather, climate, atmospheric sciences. I'm Nexrad trained, and been through advanced Satellite interpretation school.

I have forgotten MORE about the science of Meteorology than you'll ever comprehend.

Yes,k I DISAGREE with the consensus. So did pretty much everyone I know. One retired Chief I know, he and I go back and forth, he's a believer in AGW. He's one chief.

I've been to seminars with very smart people, got to sit down and talk with the likes of Dr. Gray out of Colorado back in the day. They didn't buy the AGW non-sense. Neither do I.

That I disagree isn't a matter of DENIAL, it's a matter of seeing the evidence, and finding a different conclusion based on my knowledge, judgement and experience.

You haven't the decency to even acknowledge the possibility that those that disagree with your position might just be doing so from an honest, intelligent position.

You just attack, and talk down to, and insult. Frankly, I've had about enough of you and your AGW crowd. You aren't about the science, you are about the POLITICS.

Deal with that.
Click to expand...

Thanks for confirming what I said.
 
Renae said:
I can think of no great indictment of you as a poster than this post.
Click to expand...

LOL.

You did confirm it. You're a tech in weather. You should be proud of it...but don't pretend that it makes you a scientist.

You met an actual climate scientist, once, and talked to him. No doubt that was 25 years ago, and you still think your conversation with him reflects current thinking.
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL.

You did confirm it. You're a tech in weather. You should be proud of it...but don't pretend that it makes you a scientist.

You met an actual climate scientist, once, and talked to him. No doubt that was 25 years ago, and you still think your conversation with him reflects current thinking.
Click to expand...

I never pretended that. That's your strawman. You haven't ANY experience or training, you think your true belief makes you right. You, are the best, worst face of the AGW movement we have.
 
Renae said:
I never pretended that. That's your strawman. You haven't ANY experience or training, you think your true belief makes you right. You, are the best, worst face of the AGW movement we have.
Click to expand...

I think once again you are confused about what a strawman is.
 
Threegoofs said:
I think once again you are confused about what a strawman is.
Click to expand...

Threegoofs said:
LOL.

don't pretend that it makes you a scientist.
Click to expand...

Also, you presume that I stopped contact, study and learning on the subject when I got out. I keep up with what's going on. Weather Sciences of all kinds, like the weather itself, is ever changing. The amount of pure science in the field I've forgotten is more than you'll ever know.
 
Renae said:
Also, you presume that I stopped contact, study and learning on the subject when I got out.
Click to expand...

I don't presume.

I know it by reading your posts.

You know weather (maybe), but you're clearly clueless on climate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Threegoofs said:
I don't presume.

I know it by reading your posts.

You know weather (maybe), but you're clearly clueless on climate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Why? Because I disagree with your position? You cannot forecast without Climate Science. You have no tally no clue how much we LEARN about climatology.

Again, just because I do not agree with your position, doesn't mean I'm stupid, unintelligent, uninformed or reach my conclusions based on ignorance. Can you admit this or no?
 
Renae said:
Why? Because I disagree with your position? You cannot forecast without Climate Science. You have no tally no clue how much we LEARN about climatology.

Again, just because I do not agree with your position, doesn't mean I'm stupid, unintelligent, uninformed or reach my conclusions based on ignorance. Can you admit this or no?
Click to expand...

No. Your ignorance is completely independent of my position.

I only highlight it when you display it.

Consider it a learning opportunity.

You're welcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Threegoofs said:
No. Your ignorance is completely independent of my position.

I only highlight it when you display it.

Consider it a learning opportunity.

You're welcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Okay. So you admit you have nothing.

/wave I won't bother with you further. I win.
Game, set, match.
 
Anybody read the logs? They're not doing so well.
 
Threegoofs said:
Has anyone seen the summer ice coverage?

It's not doing so well either.

Which is kinda the point of this stupid thread.
Click to expand...

Except their voyage looks like its failing.
 
Threegoofs said:
Two months before the minimum extent of ice?

Whatever you have to tell yourself.
Click to expand...

Did you read anything? They are on the 2nd leg of their Journey. They waited for the ice once already. It is a 2 month journey, and they are in a slow sailboat. If they wait for the peak to start where the ice normal is now, it will just then close up on them later.

There was already suppose to be an ice free path!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom