• 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!

No One Can Understand My Global Warming Argument

longview said:
Not at all, I was showing that the consensus is of very limited scope, and does not require any of the more catastrophic
predictions to meet.
As to publishing, nothing I have said would be considered new art, I.E. a new concept.
Click to expand...

But unless it is in the required, sacred, text how is he supposed to know if it is valid?????? run away help me mommy!!!!
 
Tim the plumber said:
So do you have the courage to look at the numbers?
Click to expand...

Most climate scientists have already come to the conclusion that you refuse to accept. Clearly you don't accept it because you have published research to the contrary, so where is that research?
 
Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
So do you have the courage to look at the numbers?
Click to expand...

Phys251 said:
Most climate scientists have already come to the conclusion that you refuse to accept. Clearly you don't accept it because you have published research to the contrary, so where is that research?
Click to expand...

So that will be a "NO!!! I will not let heresy into my brain!" then.
 
Tim the plumber said:
So that will be a "NO!!! I will not let heresy into my brain!" then.
Click to expand...

Already coming with the personal insults I see. :lol: All you had to do was say, no, you haven't done any climate research. Interesting that you didn't.
 
Phys251 said:
Already coming with the personal insults I see. :lol: All you had to do was say, no, you haven't done any climate research. Interesting that you didn't.
Click to expand...

I have done such tiny research as to see a very obvious problem with the claim of Greenland melting.

What, pray tell, have you ever researched at all?
 
Phys251 said:
Most climate scientists have already come to the conclusion that you refuse to accept. Clearly you don't accept it because you have published research to the contrary, so where is that research?
Click to expand...

Climate 'scientists' aren't. They deny science and mathematics, just like the Church of Global Warming does.
 
Tim the plumber said:
I have done such tiny research as to see a very obvious problem with the claim of Greenland melting.

What, pray tell, have you ever researched at all?
Click to expand...

I would agree. At least you have done some research on the matter. There is no indication he has done any.
 
Tim the plumber said:
I have done such tiny research as to see a very obvious problem with the claim of Greenland melting.

What, pray tell, have you ever researched at all?
Click to expand...

Where is that peer-reviewed research?
 
Tim the plumber said:

You will do nicely as a peer.

Will you look at the numbers?
Click to expand...
:lamo

Unlike you, I actually defer to people who know what the heck they're talking about when it comes to climate science.
 
Phys251 said:
:lamo

Unlike you, I actually defer to people who know what the heck they're talking about when it comes to climate science.
Click to expand...

So making up your own mind is far too like taking responsibility for you then. OK.

I prefer to look at the facts. I don't trust people as much as you do.
 
Phys251 said:
:lamo

Unlike you, I actually defer to people who know what the heck they're talking about when it comes to climate science.
Click to expand...

Apparently not, since you are deferring to people who outright deny science...
 
Tim the plumber said:

So making up your own mind is far too like taking responsibility for you then. OK.

I prefer to look at the facts. I don't trust people as much as you do.
Click to expand...

Feel free to fire off all the juvenile insults that you want to. Doesn't change the fact that you have contributed nothing of value to the climate science discussion. :)
 
Phys251 said:
Good morning, gfm. Please provide us with your peer reviewed that falsifies the scientific opinion on climate change.
Click to expand...

Good morning, Phys...

I dismiss Wikipedia on sight. I do not consider it to be a source of anything, since it is often incomplete, incorrect, and can be edited by virtually anyone.

Science is not "peer-review". Peer review does not bless, sanctify, nor make holy any theory of science. The theory itself is all the support that is needed.

There is no such thing as "scientific opinion", just opinion. The meaning of the word opinion doesn't change due to science. There is no theory about climate change. Climate Change is a circularly-defined buzzword, thus any argumentation based on it is void. You need to provide a valid definition for the term...

Thank you,

gfm7175
 
Phys251 said:
Feel free to fire off all the juvenile insults that you want to. Doesn't change the fact that you have contributed nothing of value to the climate science discussion. :)
Click to expand...

So what was your take on my numbers about the ice mass balance of Greenland?

And, what have you contributed????

(It is said that the Narcissist will generally tell you what they are doing bad by putting it on you first. Is this an example of that?)
 
gfm7175 said:
Good morning, Phys...

I dismiss Wikipedia on sight.
Click to expand...
Then you shall be treated in kind, because Wikipedia supplies far, far more knowledge than you do. :2wave:
 
Tim the plumber said:
So what was your take on my numbers about the ice mass balance of Greenland?

And, what have you contributed????
Click to expand...

Wait, you actually have a paper out? Where?

(It is said that the Narcissist will generally tell you what they are doing bad by putting it on you first. Is this an example of that?)
Click to expand...

More juvenile insults by you. Keep it up, this is amusing. :lol:
 
Phys251 said:
Good morning, gfm. Please provide us with your peer reviewed that falsifies the scientific opinion on climate change.
Click to expand...

There have been several papers that show results outside of what the AGW dogma says. Because of this, your claims have no reality in science. The truth may be different.
 
Tim the plumber said:

You show your inability to think for yourself. Just try to not be a sheeple.
Click to expand...

Keep up the petulant comments. It just shows that you have nothing. ;)

I, on the other hand, accept the scientific opinion on climate change, brought by thousands of hours of research by people who are far more credible on this subject than you.
 
Lord of Planar said:
There have been several papers that show results outside of what the AGW dogma says. Because of this, your claims have no reality in science. The truth may be different.
Click to expand...

So you've published papers that falsify climate science? Cool! I'd love to take a look at one. Even one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom