A new study on the Ice sheet in Antartica

[tomfly]

I'm thinking................by your response, that you lost this one. Set one goes to the BUG!

FF, I know you are a "big boy", but I thought I'd help you out with this one.

Mel

Who are you MB mommy?

 

[tomfly]

Nope.

"Straight from the horse's mouth" suggests that linking to this article was a new piece of information pertaining to an existing debate. Even if you failed intro English at Lehigh Valley community college (quite possible) you can probably admit to that.

Here's an analogy. (That's when you compare something to something else):

I wouldn't link to an article on breast size reduction by Phil Mickelson's personal cosmetic surgeon, as useful as that article might be for some on this site, and frame it by saying "straight from the horse's mouth." That would make no sense. There's no existing debate. No context.

Boob.

Now all I have to do is figure out how to fit all the words in that entire master class of a burn into an enormous six paragraph essay.

I used "Straight from the horse's mouth" as a metaphor referring to a creditable scientific source NASA. Nothing more.

 

[tomfly]

Okay, okay, you win. Back to your article. On a mental level, I guess it makes sense to assume that any growth in a polar ice cap means no global warming. But the scientists quoted in the piece have the capacities to distinguish long-term growth unrelated to climate change from short term losses that have occurred during the industrial age.

When the last glaciers in Antarctica have gone to shit, maybe you’ll decide you have time to fully read articles before sending them. The Antarctica ice pack, it isn’t the whole story either. In the article, the scientist says its growth is in many ways bad news, as it suggests that the documented sea level increase resulting from other sources is higher than previously thought.

I have never said that Global warming is not taking place. The evidence that supports it is substantial. I just do not believe that there is quantifiable evidence to support argument that Human activities are causing the latest warming trend. I could agree with the argument, if there was no evidence that suggests otherwise. If the climate was stagnant and the temperature range was the same for the past ten thousand years, I would agree that humans are the problem. That is not the case. The climate has had numerous periods or both warmer and cooler temperatures then we are experiencing today. I also find no substantial evidence supporting the claim that the warming is as bad or is going to be as bad as some predict.

Now this is my opinion. The whole human created climate change is a marketing tool to sell green products ,more Government control and nothing more. Some companies are using scare tactics to become wealthy. There is substantial evidence to support that. The irony in it is; the same individuals that claim to despise the concept of Capitalism are the ones profiting on the climate change scare tactic. Marketing 101 “make them believe they need something they do not.”

 

[mudbug201]

I have never said that Global warming is not taking place. The evidence that supports it is substantial. I just do not believe that there is quantifiable evidence to support argument that Human activities are causing the latest warming trend. I could agree with the argument, if there was no evidence that suggests otherwise. If the climate was stagnant and the temperature range was the same for the past ten thousand years, I would agree that humans are the problem. That is not the case. The climate has had numerous periods or both warmer and cooler temperatures then we are experiencing today. I also find no substantial evidence supporting the claim that the warming is as bad or is going to be as bad as some predict.

Now this is my opinion. The whole human created climate change is a marketing tool to sell green products ,more Government control and nothing more. Some companies are using scare tactics to become wealthy. There is substantial evidence to support that. The irony in it is; the same individuals that claim to despise the concept of Capitalism are the ones profiting on the climate change scare tactic. Marketing 101 “make them believe they need something they do not.”

Whew. Don't know where to start. I don't think we're ever going to agree Tom, so I'm not going to waste time writing a treatise on how wrong I think you are about all of this.

But moving on... I think the bigger point I want to make is this.

Mac has low T.

 

[eddavidson9]

Now this is my opinion. The whole human created climate change is a marketing tool to sell green products ,more Government control and nothing more. Some companies are using scare tactics to become wealthy. There is substantial evidence to support that. The irony in it is; the same individuals that claim to despise the concept of Capitalism are the ones profiting on the climate change scare tactic. Marketing 101 “make them believe they need something they do not.”

Now this is my opinion. You are belligerently stupid.

 

[tomfly]

Now this is my opinion. You are belligerently stupid.

This is what I do not get about some liberals. Ed9 I thought you were above this. Instead of using facts to disprove me, you would rather resort to insults. You would say I am stupid for suggesting that the whole man made global warming go green or the sky will fall is a lie. Just take this green tool Brian Harris former CEO and go green on the tax payers back of Solyndra mad a hefty 400 grand a year. The company never made a dime. All this guy did is accumulating wealth on the backs of the tax payers in the form of grants subsidies and non paired back loans for the green millions. This is just a small piece of the pie that was handed out in billions to companies most of have failed and claimed bankruptcy and put are kids and their kids on the hook for billions. I know you are not an idiot. Think about it; put yourself in the green company CEO position. The government gives your green company money. What is the easiest make money with that, pay yourself until the money runs out and then file for bankruptcy. That is the Green human created global warming lie in a nutshell. Call me stupid all you want. Don’t take my word for it. Google it yourself most of the green take the taxpayers money companies have filed for bankruptcy.

 

[MACFLY]

Well from the way you duck and run on these threads I supposed it's better then having High E.

Whew. Don't know where to start. I don't think we're ever going to agree Tom, so I'm not going to waste time writing a treatise on how wrong I think you are about all of this.

But moving on... I think the bigger point I want to make is this.

Mac has low T.

 

[lightenup]

Well from the way you duck and run on these threads I supposed it's better then having High E.

Someone who has High E....I am assuming you are referring to higher education, would know that it is, better than, not "better then", unless of course you are referring to the past........
For example: I remember back in the day, I believe the fishing was better then.....or......Back in the day, the fishing was better than it is now......
BOOB!

 

[MACFLY]

Now this is my opinion. You are belligerently stupid.

Personal foul on eedavidson. Roughing the poster. 15 yard penalty and free kick to mud bugs head

 

[tomfly]

Someone who has High E....I am assuming you are referring to higher education, would know that it is, better than, not "better then", unless of course you are referring to the past........
For example: I remember back in the day, I believe the fishing was better then.....or......Back in the day, the fishing was better than it is now......
BOOB!

You missed your calling. You should have been a English teacher.

 

[mudbug201]

Personal foul on eedavidson. Roughing the poster. 15 yard penalty and free kick to mud bugs head

Sounds awesome. I think if I get kicked in the head a few times, your grammar and TomFly's conspiracy theories might begin to make sense.

 

[eddavidson9]

This is what I do not get about some liberals. Ed9 I thought you were above this. Instead of using facts to disprove me, you would rather resort to insults. You would say I am stupid for suggesting that the whole man made global warming go green or the sky will fall is a lie. Just take this green tool Brian Harris former CEO and go green on the tax payers back of Solyndra mad a hefty 400 grand a year. The company never made a dime. All this guy did is accumulating wealth on the backs of the tax payers in the form of grants subsidies and non paired back loans for the green millions. This is just a small piece of the pie that was handed out in billions to companies most of have failed and claimed bankruptcy and put are kids and their kids on the hook for billions. I know you are not an idiot. Think about it; put yourself in the green company CEO position. The government gives your green company money. What is the easiest make money with that, pay yourself until the money runs out and then file for bankruptcy. That is the Green human created global warming lie in a nutshell. Call me stupid all you want. Don’t take my word for it. Google it yourself most of the green take the taxpayers money companies have filed for bankruptcy.

Oh stop it. If you aren't stupid then you must be intellectually lazy or simply driven by ideology over fact. The self-superiority of "knowing" something that others don't is very seductive, as is moral outrage. People on either side of any issue are susceptible, and you have quite obviously fallen prey, as the balance of evidence does not sway you. You'd rather seek out conspiracies and use facile arguments and straw men than address the actual overwhelming body of evidence, which is easy enough to follow and has been discussed here before. Obviously, nobody stands to gain monetarily from climate science denialism...or maybe you should apply the same level of scrutiny to both sides and see who comes out ahead.

some pertinent resources can be found within the following discussions, if you really are looking for reliable citations:
Climate Change Research Distorted and Suppressed | Union of Concerned Scientists
https://www.reddit.com/r/environmen..._home_schooled_all_my_life_by_my_uber/cwgcba0

 

[Future Fanatic]

This just in...
CO2 ain't ALL bad...
Carbon Dioxide: The Good News | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

 

[MACFLY]

This just in...
CO2 ain't ALL bad...
Carbon Dioxide: The Good News | The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

You need to get with the program Sir. CO2 is bad

 

[MACFLY]

Isn't it intellectually lazy to not challenge the science. To accept it all without question. Here is another guy who has doubts about human induced global warming. I wouldn't call him intellectually lazy.

Freeman Dyson Takes on <br/>the Climate Establishment by Michael D. Lemonick: Yale Environment 360

Oh stop it. If you aren't stupid then you must be intellectually lazy or simply driven by ideology over fact. The self-superiority of "knowing" something that others don't is very seductive, as is moral outrage. People on either side of any issue are susceptible, and you have quite obviously fallen prey, as the balance of evidence does not sway you. You'd rather seek out conspiracies and use facile arguments and straw men than address the actual overwhelming body of evidence, which is easy enough to follow and has been discussed here before. Obviously, nobody stands to gain monetarily from climate science denialism...or maybe you should apply the same level of scrutiny to both sides and see who comes out ahead.

some pertinent resources can be found within the following discussions, if you really are looking for reliable citations:
Climate Change Research Distorted and Suppressed | Union of Concerned Scientists
https://www.reddit.com/r/environmen..._home_schooled_all_my_life_by_my_uber/cwgcba0

 

[golden beetle]

Its always smart to question authority.

Like when your doctor tells you to stop smoking and drinking, and to lose weight because you got type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and liver sirosis.

What does he know, that the public relations goons at Philip Morris don't?

Keep smoking, eating, and drinking ourselves to death - nevermind the planet.

People don't even give a shit about their own bodies.

So I say...

Question the doctors and scientists.

Not the corporations.

 

[mudbug201]

Isn't it intellectually lazy to not challenge the science. To accept it all without question. Hers znother guy who has doubts sbout human induced global warming. I wouldn't call him intellectually lazy.

Freeman Dyson Takes on
the Climate Establishment by Michael D. Lemonick: Yale Environment 360

Ding ding ding. Congratulations on finding the single most reputable scientist (not a climate scientist mind you) who has publicly downplayed man-made global warming.

If you're desperate enough, you can find anything on Google. Never mind that basically the entire scientific community is scratching their heads about this guy. Basically you can be really smart about some things, and still weird and senile enough to believe global warming is not a problem. Who knew?!

Oh, and CO2 - probably not good. Anyway, I'm not going to trust these guys on the matter.

 

[MACFLY]

No not a climate scientist but his concern is with the modeling that's used. He's kind of an expert on that. I love the not so subtle dig (he doesn't agree so he must be senile). That's being intellectually lazy.

Ding ding ding. Congratulations on finding the single most reputable scientist (not a climate scientist mind you) who has publicly downplayed man-made global warming.

If you're desperate enough, you can find anything on Google. Never mind that basically the entire scientific community is scratching their heads about this guy. Basically you can be really smart about some things, and still weird and senile enough to believe global warming is not a problem. Who knew?!

Oh, and CO2 - probably not good. Anyway, I'm not going to trust these guys on the matter.

 

[MACFLY]

Or you could question both sides. Would you have a problem with that?

Its always smart to question authority.

Like when your doctor tells you to stop smoking and drinking, and to lose weight because you got type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and liver sirosis.

What does he know, that the public relations goons at Philip Morris don't?

Keep smoking, eating, and drinking ourselves to death - nevermind the planet.

People don't even give a shit about their own bodies.

So I say...

Question the doctors and scientists.

Not the corporations.

 

[mudbug201]

No not a climate scientist but his concern is with the modeling that's used. He's kind of an expert on that. I love the not so subtle dig (he doesn't agree so he must be senile). That's being intellectually lazy.

He's an expert on climate change modeling?

 

[MACFLY]

He's an expert on climate change modeling?

If I use your logic then Al Gore, bill Nye, & the knucklehead Kennedy are all full of crap since they aren't "climate change scientists". now freeman Dyson shouldn't be in the same sentence with Those boobs but more importantly you just reacted without even knowing his complete view on climate change. If you want to blindly except everything the IPCC is selling that's your right but it makes you the intellectually lazy individual or as eedavidson so eloquently put it belligerently stupid.

 

[mudbug201]

If I use your logic then Al Gore, bill Nye, & the knucklehead Kennedy are all full of crap since they aren't "climate change scientists". now freeman Dyson shouldn't be in the same sentence with Those boobs but more importantly you just reacted without even knowing his complete view on climate change. If you want to blindly except everything the IPCC is selling that's your right but it makes you the intellectually lazy individual or as eedavidson so eloquently put it belligerently stupid.

You've really taken this intellectually lazy thing and run with it Mac. It's like your new catch phrase.

But who said anything about Al Gore again? You're dodging the point. Forget bill nye (the science guy?why are we talking about him?) Dyson shouldn't be in the same sentence as legitimate climatologists. Even he admits that. Boob.

Now I'm going to take my intellectually lazy ass to bed before this gets too taxing for me.

 

[MACFLY]

Nice deflection. Yeah get some rest cause clearly you need it.

You've really taken this intellectually lazy thing and run with it Mac. It's like your new catch phrase.

But who said anything about Al Gore again? You're dodging the point. Forget bill nye (the science guy?why are we talking about him?) Dyson shouldn't be in the same sentence as legitimate climatologists. Even he admits that. Boob.

Now I'm going to take my intellectually lazy ass to bed before this gets too taxing for me.

 

[Matt Grobert]

I used "Straight from the horse's mouth" as a metaphor referring to a creditable scientific source NASA. Nothing more.

Tom, that's an idiom, not a metaphor.

As for the disagreeing factions here, I'm going to build a wall to keep you guys apart, and Garden State Trout is going to pay for it. It's going to be the best, most fantastic, beautiful wall you have ever seen. It's going to be great, and it's going to make NEFF great again. In fact, NEFF will be greater than it ever has been.

It's going to be fantastic!

 

[eddavidson9]

Isn't it intellectually lazy to not challenge the science. To accept it all without question. Here is another guy who has doubts about human induced global warming. I wouldn't call him intellectually lazy.

But Tom isn't exactly challenging the science now, is he? He's pointing to ulterior motives and possible political corruption to compile ad hominem arguments against the scientists. That is intellectually lazy. Also, stating that he has not found any evidence for the various scientific consensuses indicates he is not trying very hard.

 

[MACFLY]

But Tom isn't exactly challenging the science now, is he? He's pointing to ulterior motives and possible political corruption to compile ad hominem arguments against the scientists

. That is intellectually lazy. Also, stating that he has not found any evidence for the various scientific consensuses indicates he is not trying very hard.

Ok I get your point but I have done enough Business with the government to know ulterior motives exist on both sides of the argument. I'm just saying you are berating tomfly for blindly following one side. I think the argument that freeman Dyson makes is valid. He says there is evidence that supports the claim for AGW but the models don't reflect all of the variables. Dogma exists on Both sides of the argument so to quote Mr Dyson " Heretics are needed to ultimately move things forward" I can tell you straight up the more you call people stupid or like the Kennedy clown suggest those who don't believe in AGW should be imprisoned the more resistance and lack of success you will achieve in coming to a viable solution. I fault those on the right for their approach but I think you have some really dangerous people on the left who do not help the cause either.

 

[tomfly]

But Tom isn't exactly challenging the science now, is he? He's pointing to ulterior motives and possible political corruption to compile ad hominem arguments against the scientists. That is intellectually lazy. Also, stating that he has not found any evidence for the various scientific consensuses indicates he is not trying very hard.

I did argue the science, in a previous post in this thread. Mac is correct until every variable that could be a factor for the warming trend other then human involvement can be dismissed. The models will be subjective. There many; biological , geological , solar output , variations in the earths orbit and magnetic field all have had an effect on the climate in the past and will in the future. I never argued the point that green houses gasses are part of the problem but I think it is not the whole problem. Until the entire complement of natural processes that influence the climate can be eliminated as the cause, an affective solution can not be assured. What if they are wrong and it is something more ominous and the underlying cause is not what some religiously believe it to be. The problem would escalate without a resolution and time and resources would be wasted. What should be done and it is not; all sides should get together and build a climate model not on proving one point or another but to find the truth. When science is done without prejudice the truth can be revealed.

 

[eddavidson9]

I did argue the science, in a previous post in this thread. Mac is correct until every variable that could be a factor for the warming trend other then human involvement can be dismissed. The models will be subjective. There many; biological , geological , solar output , variations in the earths orbit and magnetic field all have had an effect on the climate in the past and will in the future. I never argued the point that green houses gasses are part of the problem but I think it is not the whole problem. Until the entire complement of natural processes that influence the climate can be eliminated as the cause, an affective solution can not be assured. What if they are wrong and it is something more ominous and the underlying cause is not what some religiously believe it to be. The problem would escalate without a resolution and time and resources would be wasted. What should be done and it is not; all sides should get together and build a climate model not on proving one point or another but to find the truth. When science is done without prejudice the truth can be revealed.

Tom,

I apologize for my prior treatment of you. I dealt with you as though you were capable of rational thought, and for that i am truly sorry. I did not realize you were developmentally disabled. I wholly support your continued pursuit of the sciences. Please accept my heartfelt apology. I know that you are trying your best, and, believe me, you have taught us all so very much. Please continue your pursuits and keep us (and ipcc) abrest of any developments. But please...please vet them through Mac first. If for no other reason then to have them made legible.

Yours in love and truth and equality

Ed

PS yes I'm drunk and having fun on this interspace thingamabob that mavis told me about kooooooooolbeeeeeens. Apologies to all.

 

[MACFLY]

Careful Ed you have Some spelling and grammar errors in your post. I'm sure LU & Mudbug will point them out.

Tom,

I apologize for my prior treatment of you. I dealt with you as though you were capable of rational thought, and for that i am truly sorry. I did not realize you were developmentally disabled. I wholly support your continued pursuit of the sciences. Please accept my heartfelt apology. I know that you are trying your best, and, believe me, you have taught us all so very much. Please continue your pursuits and keep us (and ipcc) abrest of any developments. But please...please vet them through Mac first. If for no other reason then to have them made legible.

Yours in love and truth and equality

Ed

PS yes I'm drunk and having fun on this interspace thingamabob that mavis told me about kooooooooolbeeeeeens. Apologies to all.

 

[lightenup]

Careful Ed you have Some spelling and grammar errors in your post. I'm sure LU & Mudbug will point them out.

He said he is drunk MAC and having fun. I wonder what your excuse is? There is no excuse for spelling errors on a computer. I was going to keep quiet, but Tom, it's there are, not there....

Effective not affective......