It seems that the past 3 years has confused them.
Ha! Ha! Peggy is a real scientific mess. She is so confused she even gave a Best Answer to the Dorkster the other day. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!
It is obvious Peggy doesn't understand the true workings of Science. A true scientist will see some action and explore why that is happening. It may not be apparent at first but every bit of further information will be analysed and thereby get closer to the truth.
In Peggy's science once an action is seen. A conclusion is reached and then the evidence is contorted to confirm the peremptory conclusion. It is backward science and not good science or not even science at all but to the lame intellects it is better to put up a fight and display your ignorance than never to have fought for your agenda driven science at all.
Tsk! Tsk! To bad people like these can't step back and see them in their real light.
In direct answer to the question: What really is 'blown' is the fact that the greenies have blown their cover as scientists. They don't have an explanation that fits their curriculum so they puff and sputter and call everyone else stupid.
They don't realize that there is an old saying that applies in this case, "If you blow out my candle, it still doesn't make yours brighter."
What science do you consider "blown" and why? Scientists are trying to understand what's going on--that's what scientists do. By the way, is anyone that is smarter than you an "extreme environmentalist" or is there some other requirement?
EDIT: Sorry, but your rantings seem completely incoherent to me. Perhaps you could get a family member to read them before you post, and to point out where wholesale gaps of logical flow need to be filled in.
Another EDIT: You guys (Zippi62 and Sagebrush) are amusing. I really have no idea what goes on inside your brains. I think I'd have to have whatever portion of the brain that controls logic removed in order to understand your thinking. You come to agreement while arguing against each other.
That's a nice saying Sagebrush, I had never heard that. While technically it is true, it ignores signal-to-noise ratio.
It's not climate change but it could be the sun, so this paper says http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.10...
>>It seems that the past 3 years has confused them.<<
That's the price you pay while learning - but, I can understand the reason you Deniers would not be familiar with the search for knowledge since that would mean breaking your Vow of Willful Ignorance and losing all of your certain-but-stupid friends and family members.
=====
? --
>>: "Global Warming is dangerous and will be catastrophic, if we don't mitigate it!" <<
I have never said that; however, I have said that “Denier lies and stupidity are dangerous and will be catastrophic, if we don’t mitigate it.”
And as evidence, we need only look at this example of your ignorance:
>>… the earth being round can be proven. Gravity can be proven. <<
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index...
Go ahead genius, prove them then – no one else ever has. That is not only wrong – it is impossible since there is no such thing as “proof” in the scientific method. However, there is (logical) proof that there is no proof in science – and even though you are too stupid to understand it, here it is (in case someone with an adult brain wants to know): There are two possible answers when testing a hypothesis: (1) reject the null hypothesis and (2) fail to reject the null hypothesis.
Jeff Masters knows more about climate than you do.
I'd rather have their doubt than your certainty
yeah great
http://theweek.com/article/index/268461/what-is-driving-the-increasingly-weird-behavior-of-the-polar-jet-stream
It seems that the past 3 years has confused them.
