|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 05/27/2007 : 21:59:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Tom M.L. Wigley admits it is necessary to present the data in such a way to find funding.
Steven Snyder wrote about global cooling; now tells us in admitted, intentional scary terms about warming.
By the way did you know the models take no account of the increased cloud cover caused by warming which will reflect the suns radiation and then causes cooling. |
No evidence, no evidence, no evidence. Do you really think that people here will take your statements as true just because you posted them? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 08:15:40 [Permalink]
|
http://tinyurl.com/39wyun
This is an Australian documentary from 1990, in it both of the scientists I refrenced in the prevoius post say on tape what I claimed they say.
Take 50 minutes and learn how scientist openly admit that funding is the goal; therefore the science must conform to the goals of the funders. Learn how scientist which present data that counters mmgw are defunded and marginalized.
Think to yourself: One set of science conclusions must be correct. Who has the incentive to present to data in a way that funding keeps coming in? Those that are funded or those that are not?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 08:31:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
http://tinyurl.com/39wyun
This is an Australian documentary from 1990, in it both of the scientists I refrenced in the prevoius post say on tape what I claimed they say.
Take 50 minutes and learn how scientist openly admit that funding is the goal; therefore the science must conform to the goals of the funders. Learn how scientist which present data that counters mmgw are defunded and marginalized.
Think to yourself: One set of science conclusions must be correct. Who has the incentive to present to data in a way that funding keeps coming in? Those that are funded or those that are not?
|
Explain to me why in the same region, the city is always 8 to 10 C warmer than the countryside. Why downtown if 4 to 5 C warmer than the neighborhoods.
Now, imagine all the cities in the world, all of its traffic, factories, ACs, all the forests being cutdown, rivers left dried, etc.
And last, without taking into consideretation any "fraudulent" reports by scientist explain to me how we donīt CONTRIBUTE to global waming.
Get the fuck out of here, man. You are being an imbecile. |
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 08:36:51 [Permalink]
|
Perrodetokio, are you attempting to explain that mmgw is caused by pavement?
Its funny how you describe as "fraudulent" the reports by science that do not receive mass funding, but assume the well funded reports must be true. Does this not sound like backwards thinking to you?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 08:49:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Perrodetokio, are you attempting to explain that mmgw is caused by pavement?
Its funny how you describe as "fraudulent" the reports by science that do not receive mass funding, but assume the well funded reports must be true. Does this not sound like backwards thinking to you?
|
Did I say ONLY pavement? Didnīt I say CONTRIBUTE to, instead of CAUSED BY?
I wrote "fraudulent" like that, referring to the reports stating that MMGW exist, because you seem to think (according to what evidence?) that most scientist are lying in order to get more funding.
|
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 09:07:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
http://tinyurl.com/39wyun
This is an Australian documentary from 1990, in it both of the scientists I refrenced in the prevoius post say on tape what I claimed they say.
Take 50 minutes and learn how scientist openly admit that funding is the goal; therefore the science must conform to the goals of the funders. Learn how scientist which present data that counters mmgw are defunded and marginalized.
Think to yourself: One set of science conclusions must be correct. Who has the incentive to present to data in a way that funding keeps coming in? Those that are funded or those that are not? |
Ugh. I'm not going to sit through an hour of some 16 year-old news cast to find your quote. Can you tell me whereabouts the scientist in question (who seems to be, from other searches, strongly in the MMWG camp) says that he has to keep saying that there's global warming to continue to receive funding? |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 09:17:36 [Permalink]
|
Perrodetokio, the amount of the earth under pavement is very small.
Perrodetokio said: "all the forests being cutdown"
No Perro, all the forests are not being cut down; not even most, in fact the rates of forest harvesting is being reduced.
How does man cause the drying of rivers? And where does that water go?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 09:21:21 [Permalink]
|
Cuneiformist, I do not have time at the moment, but I shall give you the time stamps so you can see these two scientists in their own words.
The one scientist says that he was right about global cooling and its scary effects, and in the same breath says that global warming is going to have scary effects.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 09:32:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Perrodetokio, the amount of the earth under pavement is very small.
Perrodetokio said: "all the forests being cutdown"
No Perro, all the forests are not being cut down; not even most, in fact the rates of forest harvesting is being reduced.
How does man cause the drying of rivers? And where does that water go?
|
The north east of Argentina flood every year due to the forests being cut down further up north and at the same time, mining operations in La Quiaca, northwest Argentina have dried up a river. If you undesrtand spanish, Iīll post the relevant information. If not, educate yourself and donīt waste my time.
Perhaps in the "first world" forest are not being cut down by multinationals, so those same companies come to the "third world" in order to do exactly that.
Botnia is not allowed to have a paper-pulp processing plant in Finland (because it contaminates) so they installed it Uruguay, etc. ect.
|
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 09:51:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Cuneiformist, I do not have time at the moment, but I shall give you the time stamps so you can see these two scientists in their own words.
|
Great!
| The one scientist says that he was right about global cooling and its scary effects, and in the same breath says that global warming is going to have scary effects. |
Even if this is true, it doesn't prove much. In any large body of professionals-- be they climate scientists, astronomers, Supreme Court justices, Assyriologists, journalists, or what have you-- you'll find an odd fringe that hold disparate opinions far outside the mainstream. This doesn't mean that such opinions are wrong, but it doesn't mean they're right, either.
More importantly, it is dishonest to say that because there is a fringe opinion on some topic, that said topic is somehow seriously disputed. If a small group of astronomers and cosmologists favored a steady state universe over the Big Bang, it wouldn't mean that anyone could right suggest that the Big Bang theory is in crisis or some such.
You seem to think (and you've been called on it before) that because you can cite so-and-so who says that there is no man-made global warming (and even when the person is a credible authority on the matter, and not, say, a automobile engineer or rodeo clown), then you can fairly say that it's widely disputed or some such. But nothing could be further from the truth!
In any case, I'll look forward to watching the said portions of the video in question.
|
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 11:41:55 [Permalink]
|
Perrodetokio, you responded to the question of how man causes the rivers to dry by giving an example of man causing a river to flood?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 15:27:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Perrodetokio, you responded to the question of how man causes the rivers to dry by giving an example of man causing a river to flood?
|
No. Those examples I gave were of two different regions. In the case of the flooding, itīs not a river that floods, itīs just rain that itīs not being contained by the forest/jungle (because it is not there anymore due to industries cutting it down in order to use the wood or just to make space for something) so it flows towars the northeast of argentina flooding huge areas.
The river being dried is because the mining company diverted the many streams from their natural beds so they donīt meet, hence thereīs no river, causing the region to be a fucking desert.
Two different regions separated by thousanths of kilometres.
|
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2007 : 20:06:38 [Permalink]
|
Perrodetokio, did man cause the Sahara desert or was that natural; keep in mind that artifacts of mans fishing equipment has been found in that desert.
Water moves all the time from nature.
Nature is much bigger than man.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2007 : 00:34:49 [Permalink]
|
Cune, I have not forgot those time stamps, just not time yet. I did not want you to think I neglected my promise.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2007 : 11:21:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Perrodetokio, did man cause the Sahara desert or was that natural; keep in mind that artifacts of mans fishing equipment has been found in that desert. |
Oh, look, another misunderstanding of global and local effects! Not particularly surprising. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Is Global Warming a Scam (part 2)
Topic Locked
