Same with a question about a scientist who hid the truth because he 'did not want to do damage for climate science.' Only Grigo would take a stand.
No takers for a question about a published claim that global warming would make you sneeze more.
It would be a lot less lame if you'd stop lying in your questions and answers. You claimed that Jeff M "vaporized" your question when he didn't; you claimed Al Gore made a statement that we wouldn't have snow anymore and he didn't; you use crude names and lie about people's occupations, sexes etc. Even though you purport to be over 70, your style is more similar to that of an ill-mannered 12 year old.
There are no "proponents" of global warming that I know of, there are people that accept the science and those that deny it or lie about, like yourself. Why don't you ask real questions about science, rather than using this forum to promulgate your own political views?
There is a danger in you asking real questions, though--if you actually read the answers you might learn something.
EDIT: Sagebrush made a claim that Jeff M "vaporized" a question. He said that without qualification and producing no evidence for that. Jeff M says that he didn't, and since Jeff M has infinitely more credibility than Sagebrush does, I believe him. Sagebrush makes the argument to me that there is no way that I could have known whether Jeff M could have done this or not. Apparently he fails to see that he has just ensnared himself in his own trap! If I had no way of knowing whether Jeff M had done this or not, then neither would Sagebrush, and yet he asserted that Jeff M had done this.
Apparently according to Sagebrush's value structure, it is okay to make unfounded accusations about people as long as no one can provide the proof that shows you're wrong. Frankly, I believe that is lying, but according to Sagebrush, if I were to say, for example, that "Sagebrush is a child molester" and no one could disprove that, then I would not be lying.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy into that sort of morality.
Another EDIT: "...my forensic evidence and Google's confirmation as to the fact.." sounds so much more impressive than "I just made it up" but the latter is much more likely to be true. Tell us:
1. What is your "forensic evidence"?
2. Exactly how did Google confirm it?
If you can't do that, then we'll just have to keep assuming you were lying.
You forgot the use of the out of context claims, he didn't specify when so itsit's still possible he'll be right, just because a, b, c, d, x, y, and z caused that before doesn't mean CO2 is not the cause now. Liberals have no use for common sense, ignore all that we know about cause and effect, CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere, let's redefine history.
It's not our job to 'prove' or 'disprove' global warming. That's why we have universities, why we send students to college, why we fund research, why we educate and train scientists, why we have peer reviewed journals, why we have organisations like the IPCC and National Academy of Science and NASA and NOAA. It's *their* job to prove global warming.
The global scientific community is pretty-much united on this topic. The planet is warming. Humans are responsible. That's *their* conclusion.
The only explanation I need to provide is this - the people who study the climate have drawn the conclusion that the planet is warming and we're responsible. I'm not a climatologist but I trust in their expertise in this matter and can direct you to their work and data. If you disagree with that data then that's your prerogative. But personal incredulity is not an argument against the scientific community, nor is it one I pay much attention to.
Response: I've never asked for a grant to study climate change. I'm not suggesting we 'change our lives'. What people like me are suggesting is that if you have experts, get those people to examine an issue, they come back having identified a problem, have attempted to ascertain what the impact of that problem will be, and have made recommendations about what has to happen to deal with it, it makes no sense for people who have no training in climatology to throw their arms up, cry 'I don't believe it', stick their head in the sand, and argue that we do nothing cause they say so. When was the last time you walked up to the flight deck on an airplane to make sure the guidance systems were properly calibrated and the pitot tubes were functioning correctly? Or did you board the plane with the not-unreasonable assumption that there are systems in place and people knowledgeable about such things who did that on your behalf because you lack the expertise personally? Same deal, in my case, with global warming...
To Kano in the comments: You've used the 'sheep Germany' argument before. It was lame then and it's lame now. You might be arrogant enough to assume you are an expert in all matters. I am not. Society operates on the basis that people have expertise in areas that others don't. It isn't a case of me being a 'sheep'. It's a case of me, having looked at the evidence produced by experts, having listened to their arguments, have accepted their conclusion. For me to disagree with that conclusion, evidence would have to be produced to the contrary and verified by those experts as having merit. There's no point in me, you, or anyone not an expert trying to decide the 'validity' of that work unless you are experienced in research in that field. I have yet to see such evidence supported by that community of experts. Your position is slimy. It's 'I'll stroke my chin looking knowledgeable by conceding that yes, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and yes it will warm the planet, but then I'll pull back and argue that the impact will be small (prove it), so I end up maintaining the position I wanted all along whilst giving some faux sense of respectability'. It's denialism in a cheap tuxedo.
Heh zippi, no I didn't run away, it seems deniers are back to their old sad game of reporting answers that scare them, I recieved deleted emails on 4 questions, with links for appeal that don't work.
Usually I ignore this and move on, but today I was in a bad mood and went to the effort of ring the internationl help line and a very nice lady at Yahoo gave me a direct contact for customer care, I have counter reported all 4 deletion and reported as "a troll" the deleter, we will have to see if Yahoo take customer care seriously.
The best argument that they can come up with is denier which is probably worse than liar because they are trying to suggest you are someone that is really bad, not just a liar.
Jeff M called me a racist, the little pc puke, without a shred of evidence and commented to me that "you are a racist" as if he had some hidden knowledge of me that I wasn't aware of. I don't typically think about someone's race (or I try try not to) but I am married to a ethnic Chinese lady whose best friend is a black woman and my wife's twin sister is married to a Mexican man so if I really were a racist, it would make Thanksgiving really awkward. Treating people as equal is racist to some I suppose, particularly the modern left that definitely does not treat everyone equally.
But we do have proof. The problem is that you simply ignore it in the same fashion as you ignore so many other things on this board. Given your abysmal interpretation of the words 'evidence' and 'source', that really is no surprise.
Global Warming went out of fashion when the Hide The Decline Emails turned up and the planet hasn't actually gotten any hotter both right about the Turn of the Century.
Global Warming went out of fashion when the Hide The Decline Emails turned up and the planet hasn't actually gotten any hotter both right about the Turn of the Century.
Who knows? Personally, I don't really care. However, this recent article I read shows that some people care. And some can change their mind. This lady's story reminds me of my own journey to AGW skepticism: http://www.skeptiforum.org/iida-ruishalm...
what makes it even more lame is Deniers spreading conservative bias propaganda and posting questions that aren't really asking anything but only trying to make a point and then they only pick answers from other deniers. And, they've been doing it for years as if they have OCD
sound familiar?
I hope this means you're finally done with Yahoo Answers
When I present evidence that global warming is happening
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010...
And that we are causing it
http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-c...
The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2013 and 2012.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...
You are the one who claims that it is a lie.
Who knows? Personally, I don't really care. However, this recent article I read shows that some people care. And some can change their mind. This lady's story reminds me of my own journey to AGW skepticism: http://www.skeptiforum.org/iida-ruishalm...
It is very simple hard science requires experiments with objective evidence. Current models have not been very accurate so they really are not a substitute for hard science. In addition nothing that we will do can avoid whatever changes that are coming. To spend vast resources fighting carbon is foolish when adaptation is the best we can expect.
You have been challenged. You make claims about other people that are not true. Ask a question about science and you will get good answers. Make rants that include likes and the lies will be clearly pointed out so that readers can understand the type of person you are.
What type of person are you?
You hate fact and the truth don't you?
I can come up with a *lot* more than "you lie".
Here, have some evidence. Maybe you'll learn something.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/
http://aip.org/history/climate/summary.h...
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...
http://www.realclimate.org/
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11...
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;... (I posted a question asking people to give links to information at varying levels of experience)
And here are a few links on ocean acidification, for good measure:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidi...
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean...
http://oceanacidification.net/
(more in additional details)
You hate fact and the truth don't you?
I hope this means you're finally done with Yahoo Answers
"You lie."and "He did not say that" are in response to your misinformation. You have seen plenty of support for AGW on this site. You have seen the plots that I have shown, with the temperatures up, while the Sun is down. Trevor, Gringo, Lin, and Chem have given countless links to data and studies. Spend some time reading Wikipedia and Skeptical science, and if you doubt them, see the references that they give. The evidence for AGW is overwhelming.
You hate fact and the truth don't you?
The only problem with your question is that reading the section for a day or two and noticing who provides scientific explanations suggests that the premise of your question is inaccurate. That seems pretty dang close to lying to me.
I hope this means you're finally done with Yahoo Answers
LOL! antarcticice ran away from this question: https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index... when I reminded him about the information about how the NOAA scaled down the warming from the 30s in favor of a cooler past. What a joke these guys are!!!
It's a lame argument that humans can have any sizeable effect on the climate of a planet that is 35,000,000,000,000 (35 trillion) times the size of all humans put together with a substance that brings most everything to life in the first place and is "essential" for keeping and maintaining a forward motion.
It's nothing but a political battle from an environmental lunacy group and always has been. Of course they will brand people as liars and mis-informers. They are out to save a world that they have no control over. Complete "LUNACY" IMO.
They're doing the best they can, given the 'quality' of their proof.......
I think it's about just about right right now. It may rain tomorrow.
You hate fact and the truth don't you?
You hate fact and the truth don't you?
I think it's about just about right right now. It may rain tomorrow.
