afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
ricecrackers wrote:you havent produced a scrap of evidence, nothing you just talk about nebulous hearsay and link to opinion pieces Neither have you. Ever. In any of your 1469+ posts to date. So produce some or shut the fuck up with your double standards.
|
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
crickets
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
RedKat wrote:There is absolutely no statistical power in on paper saying one thing and 1000s saying something else. And just to make you happy: http://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/homes/ghegerl/AR4WG1_Pub_Ch09.pdfFunny also to not that the Met Office is part of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who, in their most recent report concluded that 'Most of the global average warming over the past 50 years is "very likely" (greater than 90% probability, based on expert judgement)[45] due to human activities.' Also 'Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for—and in many cases is already affecting—a broad range of human and natural systems' How very interesting. Using them as a source means you find their opinion valid but here they are part of a body that takes the scientific side of things and conflicts with your anti-scientific, anti-evidence views. Pretty hilarious actually. Edited by RedKat: 11/6/2014 11:39:15 PM the IPCC agreed with their assessment there has been no warming. 17 years now actually. now i've proven my claim can we move on?
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
RedKat wrote:The agreed that there has been no global warming but I have quoted evidence of them saying there is.
Theres also still the thing about the amount of scientific papers published on climate warming that all come to the conclusion there is climate change and its being accelerated to man. But ricecrackers opinion is worth a million scientific papers.
What you've proven is that you can back up your argument with reliable and reputable peer reviewed scientific literature that is consistent. It looks like you're in complete and utter denial now. I dont know how you manage it. I've given you the MetOffice and the IPCC. Clear and factual data there has been no warming in 17 years and you're still yapping on about numbers of scientific papers of which cannot produce one. All the alarmist computer models that were produced 15 or more years ago have been proven to be wrong. FACT
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
RedKat wrote:ricecrackers wrote:RedKat wrote:The agreed that there has been no global warming but I have quoted evidence of them saying there is.
Theres also still the thing about the amount of scientific papers published on climate warming that all come to the conclusion there is climate change and its being accelerated to man. But ricecrackers opinion is worth a million scientific papers.
What you've proven is that you can back up your argument with reliable and reputable peer reviewed scientific literature that is consistent. It looks like you're in complete and utter denial now. I dont know how you manage it. I've given you the MetOffice and the IPCC. Clear and factual data there has been no warming in 17 years and you're still yapping on about numbers of scientific papers of which cannot produce one. All the alarmist computer models that were produced 15 or more years ago have been proven to be wrong. FACT Your again sprouting agenda driven claims that are made up on the spot with no evidence. I proved Met Office and the IPCC both believe in man accelerated climate change, providing direct quotes as well as posting just one of the many articles published by a scientist on the matter. Amazed how easily you can have such an observational selection. Ill link you a few more for you to dismiss because you dont like them: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.shorthttp://www.sciencemag.org/content/301/5635/929.shorthttp://www.pnas.org/content/106/6/1704.shorthttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2005JD006518/fullhttp://www.slvwd.com/agendas/Full/2007/06-07-07/Item%2010b.pdfId keep going but to post all the peer reviewed scientific articles on the matter, Id still be posting in 2050. agenda driven? made up on the spot? so now you're claiming the MetOffice and the IPCC made it up on the spot when they revealed there has been no warming for 17 years? Seriously? Are you trolling me now? If anything you're agenda driven by this indoctrination. There is nothing scientific about marginalising people who question an unproven theory. your first link is about consensus and it was published in 2004. how could that possibly dispute no warming for the past 17 years when its now 2014???? also, when did consensus become science? when did science become a vote? your second link was about coral reefs and was published in 2003. see above. your third was published in 2008. also see above. your fourth was published in 2006... your fifth was published in 2007... all outdated please stop
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
How long have scientific bodies been collecting data on global warming? -PB
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
ricecrackers wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:The biggest issue is that at present there are massive heat sinks in the Antarctic, the Arctic and the world's oceans that are soaking up the majority of warming for the time being.
By way of analogy if you put a glass of hot water in a chest freezer full of ice to reach equilibrium there will be a massive drop in the temperature of the water in the glass and only a slight, almost imperceptible, raising in the overall temperature of the "system".
Put that same glass in an empty freezer and the temperature of the "system" will rise, in magnitude, many times more compared to the former example.
The issue will be what happens after the earth loses it's ability to soak up the constant input of heat. The problem is it is hundreds of years from happening hence Crackers and the rest of them. you people have a bullshit explanation for when your predictions continue to fail credibility is non existent The analogy is sound. Your rebuttal isn't, though I'm happy for you to explain why.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
You do realise that this article still shows an increase in temperature, demonstrates a significant rise in sea levels and basically says that the slowing in temperature rise is because of melting ice, right? Munrubenmuz wrote:ricecrackers wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:The biggest issue is that at present there are massive heat sinks in the Antarctic, the Arctic and the world's oceans that are soaking up the majority of warming for the time being.
By way of analogy if you put a glass of hot water in a chest freezer full of ice to reach equilibrium there will be a massive drop in the temperature of the water in the glass and only a slight, almost imperceptible, raising in the overall temperature of the "system".
Put that same glass in an empty freezer and the temperature of the "system" will rise, in magnitude, many times more compared to the former example.
The issue will be what happens after the earth loses it's ability to soak up the constant input of heat. The problem is it is hundreds of years from happening hence Crackers and the rest of them. you people have a bullshit explanation for when your predictions continue to fail credibility is non existent The analogy is sound. Your rebuttal isn't, though I'm happy for you to explain why. The best part about this is that the 'evidence' which he provided actually SAYS exactly what you said. Quote:2. Understanding the potential cause of the recent pause in global surface temperature rise. There are two main ways to explain the recent surface temperature behaviour; firstly, through changes in the net amount of incoming energy to the climate system (radiative forcing) or, secondly, through redistribution of energy within the climate system, particularly through exchange between the upper and deep ocean, which can temporarily hide the warming below the surface. Both explanations have been put forward in the literature. For instance, several studies (e.g. Solomon et al 2010, 2011, Church et al 2011) have considered potential radiative forcing explanations, while others (e.g. Knight et al 2009, Meehl et al 2011, Katsman and van Oldenborgh 2011) have examined the potential ocean heat redistribution.
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
i see no apologies for forthcoming for the character attacks resultant from a claim i've made which i've proven to be true
to be expected from these cult followers
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
The article you posted still acknowledges an increase in temperature.
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
#-o
i've backed up my claims you havent
i'm no longer interested in discussing this with you as you seem to be at an afroman level of understanding on this topic
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
If by "backed up your claims" you mean "posted a link to an article that you thought was saying the same thing but actually contradicted yourself" then you sure did there buddy.
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
more afrolies to be expected
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
I read the article properly. Must be lying.
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:I read the article properly. Must be lying. finally you admit the truth
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
RedKat wrote:ricecrackers wrote:#-o
i've backed up my claims you havent
i'm no longer interested in discussing this with you as you seem to be at an afroman level of understanding on this topic Youve back up your claims with an article that wasnt saying what you were saying (that climate change 'paranoia' = depression) and the other article you posted more recently is part of a group that is the antithesis of your point. And youve failed to provide evidence of your claims about the IPCC. In contrast Ive got 10000s of scientific papers and scientists on my side and Ive provided a lot more articles. Its really sad though that we live in a culture where science is so undervalued and people feel free to reject scientific theories without evidence and justify their opinions with outlandish claims about some massive conspiracy theory. It really is a negative mark on society that something so critical to human existence is held is such low regard by the population. Its a shame that people claim theyre 'thinking critically' by ignoring evidence when they have no counter evidence. you've lost a wheel now. i claimed there has been no warming for 15 years. you disputed it i proved my claim end of discussion
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
ricecrackers wrote:afromanGT wrote:I read the article properly. Must be lying. finally you admit the truth Yes, what horrible truth. What outrageous revelation, that I read the article properly. The only person here lying is you.
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
ricecrackers wrote:RedKat wrote:ricecrackers wrote:#-o
i've backed up my claims you havent
i'm no longer interested in discussing this with you as you seem to be at an afroman level of understanding on this topic Youve back up your claims with an article that wasnt saying what you were saying (that climate change 'paranoia' = depression) and the other article you posted more recently is part of a group that is the antithesis of your point. And youve failed to provide evidence of your claims about the IPCC. In contrast Ive got 10000s of scientific papers and scientists on my side and Ive provided a lot more articles. Its really sad though that we live in a culture where science is so undervalued and people feel free to reject scientific theories without evidence and justify their opinions with outlandish claims about some massive conspiracy theory. It really is a negative mark on society that something so critical to human existence is held is such low regard by the population. Its a shame that people claim theyre 'thinking critically' by ignoring evidence when they have no counter evidence. you've lost a wheel now. i claimed there has been no warming for 15 years. you disputed it i proved my claim end of discussion You provided a link to an article which actually contradicted what you were saying. The only thing you 'proved' is that you have no fucking idea what you're on about.
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:ricecrackers wrote:RedKat wrote:ricecrackers wrote:#-o
i've backed up my claims you havent
i'm no longer interested in discussing this with you as you seem to be at an afroman level of understanding on this topic Youve back up your claims with an article that wasnt saying what you were saying (that climate change 'paranoia' = depression) and the other article you posted more recently is part of a group that is the antithesis of your point. And youve failed to provide evidence of your claims about the IPCC. In contrast Ive got 10000s of scientific papers and scientists on my side and Ive provided a lot more articles. Its really sad though that we live in a culture where science is so undervalued and people feel free to reject scientific theories without evidence and justify their opinions with outlandish claims about some massive conspiracy theory. It really is a negative mark on society that something so critical to human existence is held is such low regard by the population. Its a shame that people claim theyre 'thinking critically' by ignoring evidence when they have no counter evidence. you've lost a wheel now. i claimed there has been no warming for 15 years. you disputed it i proved my claim end of discussion You provided a link to an article which actually contradicted what you were saying. The only thing you 'proved' is that you have no fucking idea what you're on about. you're lying again :^o
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
Anyone who disagrees with ricecrackers = lying.
Anyone who has a better understanding of the topic matter than ricecrackers (so everyone) = lying
Anyone who has a more sound argument with more supporting evidence than ricecrackers = lying
The world is full of liars and ricecrackers is the last vestige of truth.
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
:-({|= just you afrodope
maybe if you stop blatantly lying :^o I might stop calling you out on it [-x just a thought :idea: choice is yours :cool:
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
There's nothing 'lying' about pointing out that the link you provided disagrees with what you're claiming. In fact, there's nothing more truthful than disagreeing with your bullshit.
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
so the paper which states there has been no warming in 15 years is saying there is warming in the last 15 years?
please, just stop it with your rubbish
|
|
|
tbitm
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
15 years is a pretty small time stamp. But the last 15 years have been the hot. 13 of the hottest 14 years on record have happened this century.
Is that not proof of warming or does each consecutive year have to be hotter to persuade you?
|
|
|
Roar #1
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:Anyone who disagrees with ricecrackers = lying.
Anyone who has a better understanding of the topic matter than ricecrackers (so everyone) = lying
Anyone who has a more sound argument with more supporting evidence than ricecrackers = lying
The world is full of liars and ricecrackers is the last vestige of truth. Yep :lol:
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
i see stormfront has returned for some e-revenge
|
|
|
Eastern Glory
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 20K,
Visits: 0
|
Lol.... This thread
|
|
|
ricecrackers
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.5K,
Visits: 0
|
serious question to the disciples of the global climate warming alarmist cult:
do you fear the devastating effects of global warming or not?
|
|
|
Roar #1
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
ricecrackers wrote:serious question to the disciples of the global climate warming alarmist cult:
do you fear the devastating effects of global warming or not? Yes very much so, in fact I'm contemplating taking my own life because the fear is really getting to me.
|
|
|