What Do We Think About Climate Change

[masrapido]

Originally Posted by Boston

Diego
and dont take this the wrong way ok
but if your not going to take those Valium
can I have some
cause my head has been throbbing all day and Im out of beer
thanks
B

Diego's on a diet. His wife said, no more drugs for you. Get out and get some life. You and your childlish "friends". Don't they have wives to screw? Or cannot any more so come up the net to screw one another?

(THAT is, I must admit, a very good question...)

So no more valium.

Diego will be survived by his wife...

[Boston]

slow eddy strikes again

well aint that the pot calling the kettle black

claims he will be impressed when I post peer reviewed articles and then proceeds to post links to neofascist crap and accusations without a peer review and all from the same unaccredited rag and all spouting the same basic drivel from the same disgruntled has been who got sued and forced to retract his statements for being such an idiot. Tell me something I haven't heard before and for god sakes why do you think I limit my time here. although Slowpokes last was another perfectly shining jewel in the crown of crap.

having posted innumerable peer reviewed articles from respected sources and observed how studiously you and others of your ilk ignore them you then slither off to make such a bold and baseless statement like your last; then to prove my point and yourself produce absolutely nothing of substance or review but instead some op ed whining of a lost law suet in the face of big brother is absolutely pathetic. You just did exactly what you accused me of

you are hilarious dude
but I can not help but appreciate a good belly laugh
it was my B day yesterday and late last night I thought I would treat myself to this thread
Im reeeeeaaaallllyyy glad I did LMAO



to have some fool come along and whine about my not having posted any peer reviewed articles in my last few and then immediately post three not peer reviewed articles from some unaccredited fascist rag by some jerk who got sued and lost for his ridiculous beliefs is just hilarious, its perfect, you could not have screwed that up any better than that dude, I can honestly say you just made a flawless argument, inadvertently and for he wrong team but still a flawless argument.

the word ignorant and hypocrite comes to mind
why is that slowpoke
are you on some kinda mission to embarrass yourself
cause that last was a whopper

but I dam sure appreciate it
moment I opened those articles and saw they were not peer reviewed


LMAO

ps

here's a good peer reviewed article for you
how about
Beyond the Ivory Tower
Oreskies
its all about the concensus of climate change you *****

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten.../1686?paged=78

and it looks like they ran out or room listing all the citations and all but two of those citations are from a different accredited publication

body slam
that boy is down
out
and done

love
B

pps
thanks for the belated B day present
that could not have been a better gift even if you had not exactly planned it that way
it was kinda like watching someone fall down
my face hurts from laughing now

[Boston]

hey hey
tell that old girl not to worry
and all in good fun
even slowpokes last was a bloody riot as I still just cant stop laughing over it
I drank a bunch of water and ate some really greasy food
works like a charm for hangovers
hope all is well
B

cheers if I had one but Im out of brew

[masrapido]

There you go. It's official:

"Dr. Ball as a climate change "denier""

So it is a word that can be used and it is not used as a derogatory term.

http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/3133

At the bottom of the page.

[masrapido]

Originally Posted by Boston

hey hey
tell that old girl not to worry
and all in good fun
even slowpokes last was a bloody riot as I still just cant stop laughing over it
I drank a bunch of water and ate some really greasy food
works like a charm for hangovers
hope all is well
B

cheers if I had one but Im out of brew

She's only 31 and I'll tell on you... and she's Colombiana...you'd be in all sorts of strifes if you were closer...

She can talk forever and look at you with such determination that you will decide to never do anything to make her look at you that way again.

I speak from experience...

[jonr]

Clearly we want to encourage global warming because at the rate nuclear weapons are proliferating, some will get used and cause nuclear winter type cooling.

[Jimbo1490]

Originally Posted by Boston

rapid global climate change

where in there does it say the temp will only go in one direction

The IPCC discounts claims that CO2 will cause the sort of 'rapid climate change' you keep prattling on about. They say that AGW via CO2 will be gradual.

Jimbo

[Jimbo1490]

Originally Posted by jonr

Clearly we want to encourage global warming because at the rate nuclear weapons are proliferating, some will get used and cause nuclear winter type cooling.

The entire "Nuclear Winter" scenario has NO scientific merit and it NEVER did. This story was concocted by a group of activist scientists who were worried about nuclear proliferation and conjured up a way to stop it or at least slow it down. They spun the tale of nuclear winter as a result. If you had read the Michael Crighton essay that was cited recently, you would know that.

Jimbo

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by Boston

Ill give you an A for effort but will have to fail you on comprehension



rapid global climate change

where in there does it say the temp will only go in one direction

B,
"Global warming" didn't take hold so now you want to change the terminology to "Climate change" in the middle of the argument.
Climate change in both directions is natural and not caused by man.

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by masrapido

Which scientists? The real scientists that claim the greenhouse effect is man-made?

Or the real scientists who claim that it isn't?

And how do you know which ones to believe?

And how do you know your choice is correct?

Plenty of products to choose from, all in fancy wrapping, all crap inside.

Don't believe any of them. Don't believe anything you don't see with your own ojos(from people, anyway).

[jonr]

Originally Posted by Jimbo1490

The entire "Nuclear Winter" scenario has NO scientific merit and it NEVER did. ... If you had read the Michael Crighton essay that was cited recently, you would know that.

Of course the Crighton essay doesn't talk about nuclear cooling at all.

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by Boston

...cause it seems to me and a whopping huge number of other scientists...

:
(Oh my God, I'm getting my jaws broken)
ETC, ETC...

[Jimbo1490]

Originally Posted by jonr

Of course the Crighton essay doesn't talk about nuclear cooling at all.

Oh, really?


Excerpted from the Michael Crighton Essay cited twice already on this thread (I just KNEW you didn't read it )

"According to Sagan and his co-workers, even a limited 5,000 megaton nuclear exchange would cause a global temperature drop of more than 35 degrees Centigrade, and this change would last for three months. The greatest volcanic eruptions that we know of changed world temperatures somewhere between .5 and 2 degrees Centigrade. Ice ages changed global temperatures by 10 degrees. Here we have an estimated change three times greater than any ice age. One might expect it to be the subject of some dispute.

But Sagan and his co-workers were prepared, for nuclear winter was from the outset the subject of a well-orchestrated media campaign. The first announcement of nuclear winter appeared in an article by Sagan in the Sunday supplement, Parade. The very next day, a highly-publicized, high-profile conference on the long-term consequences of nuclear war was held in Washington, chaired by Carl Sagan and Paul Ehrlich, the most famous and media-savvy scientists of their generation. Sagan appeared on the Johnny Carson show 40 times. Ehrlich was on 25 times. Following the conference, there were press conferences, meetings with congressmen, and so on. The formal papers in Science came months later.

This is not the way science is done, it is the way products are sold.

The real nature of the conference is indicated by these artists' renderings of the effect of nuclear winter....."


Jimbo

[Marco1]

It's official.

After reading this whole thread twice over, I have been converted.

I now know for sure that heating causes CO2 and that CO2 causes heating. Global warming produces rapid climate change that is the likely cause of the cooling we have experienced. I also know that we don't need observatories since we have much cooler computer modelling (no pun intended) that can mimic the changes in weather pattern for the next 200 years with certainty as expressed by an indian scientist over the phone.

All in all I can stand here and say with total certainty that climate changes!!!!!! DONT DENY IT!!!!

Climate changes and it can be cooler or warmer or stay the same. Any variations from that pattern is due to human interference with mother earth AKA the Pacha Mama.

Now you lot bow down and kiss the ground and repent from your wrong doings. Stop farting and learn to repeat after me:
"Climate changes, climate changes, climate changes" repeat 100 times every day facing east.

Hare climate,
hare climate,
climate climate,
hare hare. etc

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by masrapido

Which scientists?

BOSTON !!

(Once again, oh, God, I'm broken into pieces..)