Page 102 of 111 FirstFirst ... 25292979899100101102103104105106107 ... LastLast
Results 2,021 to 2,040 of 2209
  1. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #2021  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I fully agree. Homophobia made the US government and population want to ignore AIDS. When it started hitting babies and straight people, people suddenly got scared and went haywire.

    Even in Africa, where, in some places like Swaziland, it has hit 1 in 3, there is a strong stigma associated.

    Again, ignore a potential epidemic and suffer when it hits.
    Uh, no, I don't think we are agreeing here. But that's okay.
  2. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2022  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Again, you use the term "proven." Could you please show me where these scientific institutions have "proven" they can't say what will happen to global temperatures AND that they aren't eager to admit it...

    You seem to have gotten this secret information somehow. Where?
    Oops--I'm sorry I misread that. Proven--I was referring to the fact that they are wrong in what they predicted--even for the short term. Now, it is unknown, but I would argue that a climate model that cannot accurately predict short term accurately is highly unlikely to predict long term better. Perhaps I should have said "demonstrated" instead of proven. They demonstrated that their predictions have not come true--I suppose that is proof.

    If you have some fetish about "scientific institutions" and can only agree with things you are told instead of looking at information yourself, then I'm afraid that's a limitation you will have to overcome on your own.

    Secret Information? Where did I say it was secret? Or are you engaging in that same old song--attempting to project one of your fabrications on me in order to make it look like I've claimed something I have not.

    I'll keep this simple. These "scientists" that you place so much stock in told the world that Global Temperatures would continue to rise, they used Climate models to make these predictions. The Predictions were incorrect.

    If you can't process that, I can't help you.

    KAM
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2023  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Again, I ask--please point me to the science that backs up your claim.

    Just writing "Look at CO2 Concentrations and Global Temperatures" isn't any sort of proof.

    Could I have a link to some study or scientific analysis of this please? Your explanation just isn't convincing.
    First--you say that you want to make an "educated decision" then you beg for someone else to tell you the answer? Which do you want.

    I'm not sure what you are missing here. CO2 Concentrations--look it up. You will find that it is a line that increases up and to the right--relatively steady on a yearly basis.

    Now look at global temperature records--see how the pattern diverges from the CO2 line.

    It doesn't take a Climatologist to understand that this MUST mean that there are other factors in play--significant enough that it overrides the effect of CO2.

    What does that tell you about the effect of CO2 Concentrations?

    KAM
  4. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2024  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Are you a climatologist? Do you know exactly what happens to CO2 in the atmosphere? Do you know exactly how golbal temperatures occur?

    Just by pointing to numbers on a global temperature record chart means nothing. There is a story behind each number. (For example, as CO2 builds up, some gets absorbed by oceans while the majority stays in the atmosphere--leading to hotter temperatures. The last decade actually supports CO2 affecting the temperature because the individuals temps are still among the top 10 temperatures ever recorded).

    Again, all the preeminent scientific institutions say the story of CO2 affecting the temperature makes sense, even if there is not a 1 to 1 direct correlation.

    Should I trust your amateur analysis or groups that have devoted their lives to this? hmmmmm.
    No, I am not a climatologist. I don't care who you believe, or what you believe. All I care about is that people like you do not succeed in harming me because of your belief. A belief that I find to be incorrect.

    I don't believe you are capable of believing that the theory you have been fed is incorrect, or even questionable, so trying to convince you would be futile--I know this to be true. I also don't believe that you have an interest in actually looking at any information that disagrees with you chosen conclusion--you've already demonstrated that you will simply dismiss it as "right wing"--why? Because you've chosen a position, and like all the other politically motivated people, you aren't going to change regardless of how many points of divergence there are, or how many tools used are shown to be inaccurate or how many indications of manipulation have taken place.

    I really think that you just don't care, or you truly believe it. Its like arguing against someone's religious belief--a waste of my time.

    I should note--for anyone actually interested--there are a variety of places you an find more in-depth information and explanations on this issue, and SHOCK--they actually don't all agree. Find it and read it for yourself. Don't depend on someone ELSE posting what they want you to read--read it all, look at all the data available (bearing in mind some "scientists" have refused to share their data--a sure sign of something wrong), and make your own decisions.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 01/05/2010 at 05:50 PM.
  5. #2025  
    Global warming.....LOL.....everytime I hear that now I have to chuckle. I live in Charleston SC and not sure we've ever (well, let me check the reliable rings in trees first to be sure) experienced this many days in a row of lows in 20s and highs in the 40s. Yes, I know, that is a warm front to some of you, but that is one of the many reasons I live in the South, supposedly for warmer winters. Global warming? Bring it on.....please!
    Last edited by clemgrad85; 01/06/2010 at 01:15 PM.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2026  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I actually have no idea if these current weather conditions have anything to do with climate change or not, but I do chuckle when individuals provide their individual experience as example of the climate not getting warmer globally.

    It's like saying, "How can there be any uninsured people? Whenever I go to my private doctor, the waiting room is full!"
    So essentially you're ignoring the fact that the earth is actually cooling.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2027  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Once again, I ask for a reference to ANY scientific analysis that shows they wrong in what they predicted.
    You may have to wait for a long time since they shot themselves in the foot by fudging the model that their predictions are based on. Nothing scientific is required at this point. It was all bologna, not science, to begin with.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  8. #2028  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I actually have no idea if these current weather conditions have anything to do with climate change or not, but I do chuckle when individuals provide their individual experience as example of the climate not getting warmer globally.

    It's like saying, "How can there be any uninsured people? Whenever I go to my private doctor, the waiting room is full!"
    Oops...you got me....only Charleston SC is experiencing the coldest conditions in awhile.....NOT! Funny, you Global Warming alarmists always find it fine to point out when we have the warmest day or summer in 100 years (of course, that means it was that warm 100 years ago), with that some how being relevant, but not important when we have cold spells (that is just something that gets swept under the rug). When the theory is that temperatures are getting warmer, it seems that recent history seems to be showing that is just not occuring. I personally don't see any signs that we are getting cooler, but for the scientists that you seem to rely on to base their theories on models (hockey stick, for example) using tree rings as their "hard data" is laughable.

    I've said it before, and will say it again, these same folks can't accurately predict the weather in a week, yet they are sure what is going to happen to the whole planet in 30, 40, or 50 years. Give me a break, LOL, really laughable. And really, Al Gore is the best guy you could produce to push the cause, really, Al Gore? What a hoot.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  9. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2029  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Once again, I ask for a reference to ANY scientific analysis that shows they wrong in what they predicted. Although I have asked repeatedly, you can't seem to locate anything. That would put your writings swimming in the realm of (misinformed) opinion.
    I'm not your research assistant. If you want to be informed, then go to it.

    I have located many things--its easy, and apparently you just lack the desire to do more than accept what you are told by one side. Learn to use a Search Engine and do more than click away from articles that don't agree with your preconceived ideas.

    I will give you a hint--search for information on inaccuracy of Climate modeling. You will find that the predictions coming from that modeling (which is used in crafting these "solutions" to global warming) have been highly inaccurate--even in the short term.

    Let me be clear--if you are just too lazy to educate yourself, don't run around blaming me. This is a discussion forum, not a research facility. If you don't like the claims I'm making...sorry.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I certainly trust the world's scientific organizations over your "opinions." You keep talking about "facts" and how things are "proven" but have not been able to show me any scientific evidence backing up your claims.
    I'm not interested in providing you with evidence. You don't accept the evidence that is available from other sources--why would you accept them from me? You have a finely honed ability to justify ignoring things that don't bit your little mindset, so why would one bother?

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    You claim: "The dirty little secret is that these "preeminent scientific institutions" have proven they can't either--they just aren't eager to admit it. That's a fact--proven over the last 10 years."

    I see the word SECRET pretty clearly in there. I also see one of your favorites: PROVEN.
    Your ability to misconstrue things is amazing--or annoying, depending on how intentional your actions are. You made the claim that I said that the information was secret. The phrase "dirty little secret" isn't referring to "Secret Data." Its referring to the fact that no one is admitting that their Predictions were very inaccurate (again referring to the Climate Models). I didn't know you can't understand a common phrase.

    Let me give you a really simple example. Global Warming Alarmists Predicted "A" would happen. It didn't. Let me stop there and let that sink in. FACTUALLY--not an opinion, not a claim, FACTUALLY, these predictions were incorrect. That's PROOF. A prediction that does not come true is PROVEN false. If I said tomorrow in Omaha it will be 90 Degrees and Sunny and Tomorrow it is 20 Degrees and snowing...that's PROVEN wrong.

    Get off your propaganda train for a minute and maybe you can accept basic realities such as this. If not--enjoy your ignorance.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    With your providing nothing to back up your hot air, I'm beginning to think you may be the cause of global warming...
    Again--convincing you isn't my goal, and not something I'm going to spend time attempting--because I don't think it is possible. I don't think you have any intention of objective analysis, so what would it matter if I posted a dozen different links to various studies. It wouldn't matter one bit.

    Its not that you are stupid--you've just made it clear that you are a believer in AWG propaganda. You've already dismissed everything that doesn't agree with you as the product of a "right wing think tank." You buy into this "consensus" nonsense--so why should I have ANY expectation that ANYTHING I might say would change your mind?

    In short--I'm wasting my time even responding with this--because you've demonstrated to me that you aren't someone who engages in an argument--you just repeat a position--swallowed hook line and sinker. You are a nearly perfect soldier in the cause of liberalism. I can't convince a drone to turn on its queen.

    I'm sorry--I don't mean to offend you, but I'm just not getting much from trying to discuss things with you at this point.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 01/06/2010 at 03:01 PM.
  10. j0eycasco's Avatar
    Posts
    23 Posts
    Global Posts
    37 Global Posts
    #2030  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    oh, thanks for clarifying. I thought the oil and coal companies were the ones with all the money....i guess i was wrong.
    your welcome.
  11. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #2031  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Yeah, first snow in Beijing in 100 years. How many years per season?
    And this is caused by global warming? Or are you switching your term to "climate change"?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2032  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Still can't provide even a single link?

    It's just talk, talk, talk, talk, talk from you...and yet nothing substantial comes out.
    No, I'm sitting on a variety of links to stories readily available that discuss all the things you choose to live in denial of, because it doesn't meet your chosen conclusion.

    There was an interesting I saw today about long term oceanic cycles and how they are a much larger factor in ice conditions in the arctic for example than CO2 Concentrations.

    In other words--your childish prattle doesn't sway me. Oh no--Zeglo said I'm not saying anything of substance. I know--I'll play that little baiting game right away. No--I've got your number now.

    KAM
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2033  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    No, the last 10 years are still among the hottest ever recorded.

    Just because it hasn't yet hit the height of 1998 again doesn't mean the earth's suddenly cooling. The temperatures are all pretty close.
    Yes, funny how these temperatures all being "pretty close" (which is true--a fraction of a degree) is cause for a Global Disaster. When they go up--its a horrible tragedy in progress--when they go down (obliterating the hysterical predictions from flawed climate models--look it up), its an insigificant blip.

    You are right about one thing--the Earh isn't suddenly cooling--its been generally cooling for about 10 years, and may continue that trend for many more...at which time it will potentially go up again.

    Of course, the fact is that your much lauded scientific organizations climate models have made wildly inaccurate predictions. Of course, people like you choose to ignore that, change your story and pretend like none of that matters, while you keep demanding the same incoherent "solution."

    There are many scientists out there who are actually looking to account for things like...clouds, ocean currents, solar activity--all of which are likely larger influences than manmade CO2 (which remains a small portion of the atmospheric CO2), but for some reason remains the sole focus of Global Warming hysteria.

    Of course, you'll just whine and cry for "evidence," using it as an excuse to maintain your denial of the fact that you've bought into a political movement thinking it is science.

    KAM
  14. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2034  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    ...it keeps on going and going and going....
    Your ignorance and denial> Yes, that's true--it does. The facts won't change--whether I post something for you to deny or not. You will educate yourself or you won't.

    However, its pathetic to use me as your means of denial. I'm not the reason you refuse to learn--I'm just the convenient person for you to attack--to distract from the issue, by claiming that something I've said or done is improper.

    That's the liberal playbook isn't it--personalize your opposition in order to avoid dealing with the issue. Accuse a person of some sort of wrongdoing so you don't have to consider facts.

    Learn to use a Search Engine without a liberal filter, and you'll do just fine without me having to spoon feed you.

    There are many relevant issues that have been raised in this thread--and if you are too lazy to read up on them, that's your own fault--as I've said before. Don't blame others for you just increasing the size of your blinders, when you hear something that doesn't mesh with your political dogma.

    KAM
  15. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2035  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Seriously, KAM, re-read what you wrote. It's like your head is about to blow off because you can't provide any evidence of your opinions AT ALL.
    No, no no. How many times do you have to be told something to understand it. I'm not playing that game with you. I know you like to think that you can create your own rules and it upsets you when others won't play by them, but that's just the way it will be.

    If I feel like posting a link, I will do it--not because you demand it.

    It is ridiculous for you to forward the notion that there is NO evidence to support my views. Surely, you understand that there isn't actual "consensus" and that there are scientists who have differing views. The debate is in fact NOT over, and the science is in fact NOT settled.

    Or perhaps you don't understand this, and that's why you think this little tactic is meaningful. In either case--it really doesn't matter. Facts are facts--whether I post a link for you or not.

    Of course, the only thing you really need to understand is that the issue of Climate change is very much NOT determined, and is an ongoing scientific study--with new data being collected all the time. If you can't accept this, then nothing else matters.

    KAM
  16. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2036  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Liberal? ...like it's somehow a bad word...

    By resorting to calling name instead of presenting evidence, your arguments are getting hollower by the second.
    A label you think is good is then somehow "name-calling." No, no--not name calling, but use of a well accepted term to describe a general position.

    Do you understand now, or should I provide you a link?

    KAM
  17. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2037  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Can you link me to those predictions made by the international scientific organizations?
    No. My claim is that AGW advocates made predictions based on climate models. Those predictions were not correct, and thus--those climate models were inaccurate--for many reasons, but including that they simply are not complex enough to account for many variables--including clouds for example.

    Now, this is very simple. My claim that these predictions were incorrect is either true or false. You can look that up on your own. I know you can do it.

    Of course, you don't want to look into that, because you will find that these computer models are VERY inaccurate, which would make you then have to consider that the conclusions based on them might also be incorrect.

    Since you are so hot on evidence--prove me wrong. Show me the computer models that were CORRECT in their predictions.

    KAM
  18. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #2038  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Well, THAT would be a first.
    Maybe in this thread--I don't recall. Of course, when I do post references to prove things--like how evidence and the scientific method work, I've noticed that silence follows.

    To be honest with you--I've always been a bit annoyed by people who continually post their cherry picked references with the seeming inability to come up with a coherent thought on their own. That's another reason I post links somewhat sparingly. I dislike parrots.

    KAM
  19. #2039  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Maybe in this thread--I don't recall. Of course, when I do post references to prove things--like how evidence and the scientific method work, I've noticed that silence follows.

    To be honest with you--I've always been a bit annoyed by people who continually post their cherry picked references with the seeming inability to come up with a coherent thought on their own. That's another reason I post links somewhat sparingly. I dislike parrots.

    KAM
    I just have to have a short response to all of these posts of yours KAM. I wouldn't claim to know my way about Global Warming and what not because I have not researched it. I have read a little and I just happen to be a person that can sorta feel out when someone knows what they are talking about. Most of the stuff I've read about it reminds me of things I heard about in elementary school (20 years ago) and that is how I can recognize that I'm not being what you would call "duped" into believe something that all of sudden science is mysteriously making an issue out of. (socialists!) I'm not saying I think humans are or are not responsible for climate change, because I am not a scientist.
    In my opinion it is important to establish credibility if you want people to really listen. I have noticed that you do not post links very often and like you did above, make excuses for not doing so when asked to backup some of your opinions. When your not credible, all you have is an opinion.

    What I'm getting at is it does not help anyone when people such as yourself go about making seemingly false statements and then don't provide links. Why would I bother to waist time googling what looks and smells like bull**** from the get-go? Not to mention it only further reduces your credibility when we witness your snarling and foaming at the mouth responses (whether you like it or not, that's how you come across).
  20. #2040  
    Well, I've posted this link before and I think does a very good job of looking at both sides of the issue. It is from a couple of years ago, but it does paint an interesting picture:

    Global Warming: Is it Real, are Humans the Cause, & can Anything be Done?
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton

Posting Permissions