2015 Warmest Year on Record

Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
potatohead said:
No one is bashing researchers that are in the minority, I'm bashing you guys for thinking you're right while simultaneously being condescending. Impressive! I wish I had the balls to take a position a slender minority held and espouse that position..

If curry, as a researcher holds a dissenting opinion from the rest of her colleagues that's her perogative and One she's earned. Further she won't be the first or last in lots of research and fields

what is troublesome is that you all reference the few holdouts as the Truth while the rest of the community is wrong. You do this because of your political believes. For that, shame on you.


"My friends friend survived a car wreck because he wasn't buckled up and flung from the car. Had he not been, he would've burned up when the car caught fire. Ergo seat belts are bad"
Click to expand...

Skeptics on this thread have posted their reasons for skepticism and have cited multiple resources backing up those positions. Instead of debating those points you deride the skeptics for being "of a minority opinion" and claim these positions are purely political.

Shame on you for refusing to debate the issue and casting personal attacks instead.

Also...good luck on growing a pair.
 
potatohead

potatohead

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
602
Whiskey_Clear said:
Skeptics on this thread have posted their reasons for skepticism and have cited multiple resources backing up those positions. Instead of debating those points you deride the skeptics for being "of a minority opinion" and claim these positions are purely political.

Shame on you for refusing to debate the issue and casting personal attacks instead.

Also...good luck on growing a pair.
Click to expand...

You're on the wrong side of history.

"Deriding the skeptics for being a minority position"? Haha, what a bizzare thing to say. You do understand "minority" isn't an insult right? I mean for you, it may be, but I digress...
Minority position is precisely the position held by skeptics. My beliefs lie in majority, the one held by the MAJORITY of the scientific community. This isn't up for debate either so not sure what you're carrying on about...

Also, don't you whine and moan about "snowflakes" all the time? Your feelings sure seem to get hurt easily. It's always the ones throwing out the term "snowflake" that are the most delicate. It's one of life's little ironic treasures I think...

In the end, what's the worse that could happen? If it's a hoax the Chinese invented, we what? End up with a more aware generation about the impact humans have on the earth? If it's true, and we mitigate/slow/end our impact, isn't that a good thing?

Despite nearly overwhelming evidence you are probably wrong, you're not going to change your mind because your politics prevents you. It's so bizarre and sad. This is precisely why after a lifetime as a R, I'm now independent.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
I'm not the one so upset that I double post a rant :whistle:

Congratulations on refusing to debate any points. Your intellectual courage is astounding. Your only argument is "More people agree with me so I'm right!!" Well done sir...well done.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Again Mr. Head, you're confusing science and scientists. I'm not disputing the science, I'm disputing the scientists. Big big difference. When the science says humans are polluting the planet and contributing to changes in the climate, thumbs up. When the scientists then say to give them my money, no thank you.
 
potatohead

potatohead

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
602
Whiskey_Clear said:
I'm not the one so upset that I double post a rant :whistle:

Congratulations on refusing to debate any points. Your intellectual courage is astounding. Your only argument is "More people agree with me so I'm right!!" Well done sir...well done.
Click to expand...

Double post? Yea it got hung up and I hit post twice. But then again you puss'd out by not actually responding to my post.

Also debate what? I don't debate people unqualified to debate. The majority of research sides with my position. Why would I feel obligated to defend what's already out there? I also don't debate 9/11 and sandy hook conspiracies. Basically what I'm saying is that your points are stupid and unqualified.

Also If I referenced economists that pushed socialism, I'd bet you'd call me a liberal, non Rational, snowflake. I'd agree with you too because I'd be ignoring overwhelimg research to the contrary. But when it comes to global warming, and because you're a phony republican, trump loving, Putin cock holster, you refute reason and science.

McCain (a true republican and hero) actually ran on a platform that addressed global warming. But you and your ilk (fake, phony Americans) have convinced yourselves that it's lie to push your anti-inllectual agenda. Honestly you should go root for Uga. Pathetic.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
@potatohead

U seem butthurt. Why would I respond to your personal insults when you refuse to debate any prior points in this thread? You aren't even making new points.

Your idea of debate seems to be hurling personal insults and claiming to be right because you believe your's is the majority opinion.

I'll debate folks like @Northeast Stinger because he actually uses logic and reason to espouse his viewpoints. I respect that even when I disagree with him. You however refuse to do the same and are not really worthy of responding to till you attempt to.

I will respond to the only slim point you have tried to make. "What's the harm?" How about billions and billions of dollars and the needless refusal to utilize our own natural resources thus leaving us dependent on foreign sources of same?
 
Last edited:
potatohead

potatohead

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
602
Whiskey_Clear said:
@potatohead

U seem butthurt. Why would I respond to your personal insults when you refuse to debate any prior points in this thread? You aren't even making new points.

Your idea of debate seems to be hurling personal insults and claiming to be right because you believe your's is the majority opinion.

I'll debate folks like @Northeast Stinger because he actually uses logic and reason to espouse his viewpoints. I respect that even when I disagree with him. You however refuse to do the same and are not really worthy of responding to till you attempt to.

I will respond to the only slim point you have tried to make. "What's the harm?" How about billions and billions of dollars and the needless refusal to utilize our own natural resources thus leaving us dependent on foreign sources of same?
Click to expand...

Your final paragraph just exposes you. Lol, keep slurping on the Koch brothers propaganda.
Funny you can't address similar minority positions that's you'd surely refute because your "feewings" get hurt. You can't of course because you cling to this new age republicanism that will destroy our party. You're the problem.

I have no obligation to respect your position. Zero. Welcome to the adult world. Like I said, you're on the wrong side of history snowflake.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
@potatohead

Dude you are rambling and incoherent. Take a deep breath, and try to calm down.

For the record none of your personal insults have hurt my feelings in the least. Not your previous insinuation I'm a racist, not your use of a sexual perjorative claiming I give Putin physical pleasure, and not calling me a phony American.

As for the Republican Party, I've pretty much given up on them as a viable party anymore. You are welcome to them.

I don't need to select ignore your account to ignore your drivel. Simple fact of the matter is you are too intellectually shallow to debate any points and thus resort to nasty personal attacks. Cowardly nasty comments you wouldn't make face to face but feel safe hurling behind the safety of your keyboard. I won't respond to your trolls further.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Potato head - when all you do is insult people, it's devestating to your intent to get people to agree with your side of the argument. It makes your side look paranoid and unstable. Not helpful.

There are so many straw men in your post it's incredible.

And McCain as an illustration doesn't help. This is a guy who railed against the ACA for 7 years and then singlehandedly torpedoed the effort to fix it. He's spent his life acting like that.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
That's the problem with all this. You can bet they don't have any automatic cleansing of data on the high side during the summer. Oh but lets have a floor during the winter. Sigh.

I've seen lots of articles about what parts of the earth are above average (using surface temperature measurements), and often times they show sections of the earth where they don't even have temperature measurements - like remote sections of the ocean.

This is all such bad form. Some of those folks have realized their only option for getting the results they want is to make adjustments to the actual data. Unfortunately for them, they can't go back and make adjustments to or delete all their forecasts and predictions. And that's just double devastating. Because if the data is showing (falsely) an increase in temperatures but for no negative weather impacts like they predicted, they've really backed themselves into a corner. Oh well.
 
Northeast Stinger

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,663
Wow. I go on vacation for a while (and go dark) and I come back to several pages of comments. Not sure I am interested enough to read them all but here is free toss up question for the group just for fun.

Which of the following is the most heavily subsidized by the government? Extra credit for ranking them in order.

A. Solar Energy
B. Cars
C. Commercial aviation
D. The Oil Industry

yes, this is a trick question but in my opinion it reveals biases.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Northeast Stinger said:
Wow. I go on vacation for a while (and go dark) and I come back to several pages of comments. Not sure I am interested enough to read them all but here is free toss up question for the group just for fun.

Which of the following is the most heavily subsidized by the government? Extra credit for ranking them in order.

A. Solar Energy
B. Cars
C. Commercial aviation
D. The Oil Industry

yes, this is a trick question but in my opinion it reveals biases.
Click to expand...

Here is a trick answer. Tax write offs by the company (like R&D) don't count. Because then whoever is biggest gets the most. Plus, the consumer matters most since technically companies don't pay taxes - they just pass it along as a cost. So which industry has their consumers most heavily subsidized to incent them to buy their products.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
AE 87 said:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/drilli...about-federal-oil-gas-subsidies/#5b08367f6e1c
Click to expand...

That's a good read. Plus, as I said, much of that is not specific to oil and gas. But giving consumers massive tax breaks percentage-wise specifically on green energy products like solar panels and electric cars is what I was hinting at. Oil companies make about a 8%-9% profit margin - most people wouldn't even get out of bed for that much money. In fact, the government makes more money on taxes off of gasoline than the oil industry does on profit. So all this BS about tax breaks for oil companies is poppycock. Its only because the companies are so big that the numbers look big. Percentage-wise its peanuts. Consumers pay out the rear end on taxes when they buy gas. But the government pays out of the rear end in tax breaks to incent people to buy green products. I got quoted $30k a few years ago to put solar cells on my roof - about $18k after tax breaks. That is an amazing subsidy to get me to buy that stuff...the consumer is taxed if they buy one thing, begged and pleaded with to buy the other. Apples and Oranges.
 
Whiskey_Clear

Whiskey_Clear

Banned
Messages
10,486
Northeast Stinger said:
Wow. I go on vacation for a while (and go dark) and I come back to several pages of comments. Not sure I am interested enough to read them all but here is free toss up question for the group just for fun.

Which of the following is the most heavily subsidized by the government? Extra credit for ranking them in order.

A. Solar Energy
B. Cars
C. Commercial aviation
D. The Oil Industry

yes, this is a trick question but in my opinion it reveals biases.
Click to expand...

To be honest you didn't miss much :D
 
Top