"Polar Temperature Recordings ‘Proving’ Climate Change Nothing More than a Guess"

[turtlespeed 226]

quade

***One without a job that depends on the outcome of his report.
One who won't lose funding if he reports the wrong thing.

Turtle, you make this far too easy.

Please find me the legitimate climate scientist on the denier side who isn't funded by energy companies.

Why? Both sides are just as guilty.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

quade

***One without a job that depends on the outcome of his report.
One who won't lose funding if he reports the wrong thing.

Turtle, you make this far too easy.

Please find me the legitimate climate scientist on the denier side who isn't funded by energy companies.

So you're saying that the government has purged all denier side climate scientists. The research grants have been politicized to the people interested where any "legitimate" climate scientist who doesn't toe the line must look to private industry for funding.

I had always thought that the government was more reasonable than that. Looks like the email hack showed that Mann et al did what they said they would. Destroy all oppositiJudge

Judith Curry is an example, though.

Now, name me a legitimate climate scientist on the alarmists side who hasn't accepted honoraria from an environmentalist organization.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 4]

Not the point.

Point is; how many people can afford to do any work anywhere completely pro-bono? My guess is there aren't a lot of qualified scientists on either side who are independently wealthy and completely fund their own research.

If people are going to bitch about scientists on the pro side being paid and discount their work, then they have to also give equal weight to that justification against the con side.

If that's the case, then it's a wash and a stupid waste of time arguing that particular point.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[winsor 236]

quade

Not the point.

Point is; how many people can afford to do any work anywhere completely pro-bono? My guess is there aren't a lot of qualified scientists on either side who are independently wealthy and completely fund their own research.

If people are going to bitch about scientists on the pro side being paid and discount their work, then they have to also give equal weight to that justification against the con side.

If that's the case, then it's a wash and a stupid waste of time arguing that particular point.

Nice try.

[lawrocket 3]

quade

Not the point.

Point is; how many people can afford to do any work anywhere completely pro-bono? My guess is there aren't a lot of qualified scientists on either side who are independently wealthy and completely fund their own research.

If people are going to bitch about scientists on the pro side being paid and discount their work, then they have to also give equal weight to that justification against the con side.

If that's the case, then it's a wash and a stupid waste of time arguing that particular point.

It's pretty much always a waste of time to look at who is paying for something. Especially in matter of science where the truth is not on my verifiable but has hopefully been verified.

It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Because you as a pro science fella embrace and extoll logical fallacy. When logic doesn't work let's go with fallacy to make our point. Yes. Specifically targeting a logical fallacy tk make your point.

Meaning it isn't about science or reason. It's about politics.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 4]

lawrocket

It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 226]

quade

***It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Amazon 7]

turtlespeed

******It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

[turtlespeed 226]

Amazon

*********It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

Miss the context of the conversation much?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

Amazon

*********It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

And the Koch card is played again. I think global warming and climate change has led directly to the demonization of Koch brothers. They were never demonized when CO2 was below 350 ppm. I think elevated CO2 Doss something to people's rationality.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[turtlespeed 226]

lawrocket

************It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

And the Koch card is played again. I think global warming and climate change has led directly to the demonization of Koch brothers. They were never demonized when CO2 was below 350 ppm. I think elevated CO2 Doss something to people's rationality.

The Koch card is the new Godwin. Anytime anyone says anything disagreeing with global warming, just mention Koch and. . . Voila argument over, liberals win.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Amazon 7]

lawrocket

************It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

And the Koch card is played again. I think global warming and climate change has led directly to the demonization of Koch brothers. They were never demonized when CO2 was below 350 ppm. I think elevated CO2 Doss something to people's rationality.

So you give a pass to a family that has enriched itself on the pollution of epic proportions.... I wonder how many people they have killed with that shit... Great compassionate conservatives..... keep voting for their stooges.

[rushmc 23]

quade

A Dr. of Social Anthropology is about as qualified to make that statement as any, say, burger flipper who ditched high school science.

How about an economists who started all this BS?

Quote

The 2 deg C global warming limit, above pre-industrial temperatures, is back in the news. That limit was first proposed in the 1970s by an economist, not a climate scientist, according to the article Two degrees: The history of climate change’s ‘speed limit’ at TheCarbonBrief. Authors Mat Hope & Rosamund Pearce note:

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2014/12/two-degrees-a-selected-history-of-climate-change-speed-limit/

Quote

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/18/2-deg-c-global-warming-limit-in-the-news-recent-comments-by-james-hansen-godfather-of-climate-alarmism/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

Amazon

***************It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

And the Koch card is played again. I think global warming and climate change has led directly to the demonization of Koch brothers. They were never demonized when CO2 was below 350 ppm. I think elevated CO2 Doss something to people's rationality.

So you give a pass to a family that has enriched itself on the pollution of epic proportions.... I wonder how many people they have killed with that shit... Great compassionate conservatives..... keep voting for their stooges.

Yes. Just like I give a pass to governor Jerry Brown, whose great family fortune was made off of oil. Or to the Kennedy clan, who had nothing to do with Joe Kennedy's whiskey running and mobbed up connections.

You've talked about the sins of your family before. Do you want others to impute those sins upon you? You have described your upbringing as being far from enlightened. Are you just a continuation of your family? Your viewpoint of punishing children for the sins of their parents is rather Sharia in nature. You shouldn't be held accountable for what your family did and neither should anyone else.

I don't criticize Moonbeams for being his dad's son. He had no choice. I'll criticize him and the Kennedies and the Kochs for whatever they do themselves. Not for what grandpa Joe did.

Do you get a free pass for what your family did? How many people has Kennedy killed? Or the Brown family. Nite: the Kochs like the Browns were engaged in legal products.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

[email]

lawrocket

******************It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

And the Koch card is played again. I think global warming and climate change has led directly to the demonization of Koch brothers. They were never demonized when CO2 was below 350 ppm. I think elevated CO2 Doss something to people's rationality.

So you give a pass to a family that has enriched itself on the pollution of epic proportions.... I wonder how many people they have killed with that shit... Great compassionate conservatives..... keep voting for their stooges.

Yes. Just like I give a pass to governor Jerry Brown, whose great family fortune was made off of oil. Or to the Kennedy clan, who had nothing to do with Joe Kennedy's whiskey running and mobbed up connections.

You've talked about the sins of your family before. Do you want others to impute those sins upon you? You have described your upbringing as being far from enlightened. Are you just a continuation of your family? Your viewpoint of punishing children for the sins of their parents is rather Sharia in nature. You shouldn't be held accountable for what your family did and neither should anyone else.

I don't criticize Moonbeams for being his dad's son. He had no choice. I'll criticize him and the Kennedies and the Kochs for whatever they do themselves. Not for what grandpa Joe did.

Do you get a free pass for what your family did? How many people has Kennedy killed? Or the Brown family. Nite: the Kochs like the Browns were engaged in legal products.


So what are the Koch Brothers financials for the amount of fines their companies have had leveled against them... its not in the distant past... it is current.. and they get people like you to support them thru their compassionate conservative think tanks... a lot of money spent to bend the wills of weak minds..... like the ASTRO TURF Tea Party they created and continue to fund peopled by people living off the very government they get their monthly checks from.. yet support the Pay no attention to the Men Behind the curtain that wish to take all of that away from them..... Serious Drain Bammage there.

[lawrocket 3]

I don't give a rat's ass about the Koch brothers. I disagree with how pro union they are.

But I have no doubt that the Koch brothers are no more powerful than Richard Melton Scaife of the nineties. You have to have a bogey man. It is necessary. It can't be people that support a cause.

No, occupy was street wasn't originated by Soros. He sure supported it and funded it but the rapes and robberies and stuff were not his doing. It is indeed possible for people to have views opposite of yours who were not brainwashed by the Kochs and Fox News.

Yes, Jane Meyer's hatchet piece in 2010 did the same thing to the Kochs that her earlier piece did to Soros. Provide a target for the sides.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

lawrocket

I don't give a rat's ass about the Koch brothers. I disagree with how pro union they are.

But I have no doubt that the Koch brothers are no more powerful than Richard Melton Scaife of the nineties. You have to have a bogey man. It is necessary. It can't be people that support a cause.

No, occupy was street wasn't originated by Soros. He sure supported it and funded it but the rapes and robberies and stuff were not his doing. It is indeed possible for people to have views opposite of yours who were not brainwashed by the Kochs and Fox News.

Yes, Jane Meyer's hatchet piece in 2010 did the same thing to the Kochs that her earlier piece did to Soros. Provide a target for the sides.

And David Koch by virtue of his influence at PBS and the showing or not of Citizen Koch on PBS means nothing right??

[lawrocket 3]

Amazon

***I don't give a rat's ass about the Koch brothers. I disagree with how pro union they are.

But I have no doubt that the Koch brothers are no more powerful than Richard Melton Scaife of the nineties. You have to have a bogey man. It is necessary. It can't be people that support a cause.

No, occupy was street wasn't originated by Soros. He sure supported it and funded it but the rapes and robberies and stuff were not his doing. It is indeed possible for people to have views opposite of yours who were not brainwashed by the Kochs and Fox News.

Yes, Jane Meyer's hatchet piece in 2010 did the same thing to the Kochs that her earlier piece did to Soros. Provide a target for the sides.

And David Koch by virtue of his influence at PBS and the showing or not of Citizen Koch on PBS means nothing right??

Means something. But not nearly so much as you claim. It seems you really hate competing voices. Who are the other people operating against koch? Is he the only person there at PBS? Did he stop the airing of Climate of Doubt on Front line?

No he didn't.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,150]

lawrocket

************It is a logical fallacy. Ad hominem. And you focused on it. Name of e who isn't paid by petroleum industry. You gave the challenge.

Negative.

It was Turtle who opened that door.

See post #27 of this thread.

I was responding to his challenge to show how stupid it was.

Negative. See post #24.

I never challenged you to show stupidity.

I stated we needed scientists we could trust, and not those that might be blackballed from the scientific community and future income because they tell the truth, instead of massaging the numbers.

I didn't say it in those words, but the same premise still stands.

Scientists you can trust...... you mean you like to be spoon fed by Conservative approved????? David Koch would be proud of you...... maybe you should send one of their companies your resume..... they probably have a very stringent regimen of the completely adhering to their particular group mind think to be accepted.

And the Koch card is played again. I think global warming and climate change has led directly to the demonization of Koch brothers. They were never demonized when CO2 was below 350 ppm. I think elevated CO2 Doss something to people's rationality.

In order to play a card the card must first exist.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

The Ivory Tower card also exists. It is ad hominem.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

lawrocket

The Ivory Tower card also exists. It is ad hominem.

So is the Ambulance chasing Card........

[lawrocket 3]

Amazon

***The Ivory Tower card also exists. It is ad hominem.

I

Of course it is. And playing these cards is a means to avoid the underlying issue. this thread got hijacked by Koch brothers stuff. Someone makes a point. You don't counter it. You suggest the Koch brothers and Fox News brainwashed the person to believe that.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Here is the Ice Shelf hold back the glaciers that are on land.....Card. Its called gravity ... some of us like to play with gravity.. others don't deal with it well.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/bad-news-keeps-flowing-from-antarctica/ar-BBk54XB?ocid=mailsignout

The massive shelves of ice that ring Antarctica have been shrinking over the past couple of decades, and that could have grave implications for sea level rise.

It’s not the ice shelves themselves that pose a problem: they’re mostly afloat, so when they melt or dump massive icebergs, it doesn’t affect water levels any more than melting ice cubes make your drink rise and overflow.

But the ice shelves serve as massive barriers that slow the flow of glaciers out to sea. As the shelves shrink, the barrier weakens, allowing glaciers to start moving faster. And since that ice is land-based, it adds to sea level rise.

[turtlespeed 226]

Amazon

Here is the Ice Shelf hold back the glaciers that are on land.....Card. Its called gravity ... some of us like to play with gravity.. others don't deal with it well.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/bad-news-keeps-flowing-from-antarctica/ar-BBk54XB?ocid=mailsignout

The massive shelves of ice that ring Antarctica have been shrinking over the past couple of decades, and that could have grave implications for sea level rise.

It’s not the ice shelves themselves that pose a problem: they’re mostly afloat, so when they melt or dump massive icebergs, it doesn’t affect water levels any more than melting ice cubes make your drink rise and overflow.

But the ice shelves serve as massive barriers that slow the flow of glaciers out to sea. As the shelves shrink, the barrier weakens, allowing glaciers to start moving faster. And since that ice is land-based, it adds to sea level rise.

So. I never really liked south beach or LA.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Amazon 7]

turtlespeed

***
Here is the Ice Shelf hold back the glaciers that are on land.....Card. Its called gravity ... some of us like to play with gravity.. others don't deal with it well.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/bad-news-keeps-flowing-from-antarctica/ar-BBk54XB?ocid=mailsignout

The massive shelves of ice that ring Antarctica have been shrinking over the past couple of decades, and that could have grave implications for sea level rise.

It’s not the ice shelves themselves that pose a problem: they’re mostly afloat, so when they melt or dump massive icebergs, it doesn’t affect water levels any more than melting ice cubes make your drink rise and overflow.

But the ice shelves serve as massive barriers that slow the flow of glaciers out to sea. As the shelves shrink, the barrier weakens, allowing glaciers to start moving faster. And since that ice is land-based, it adds to sea level rise.

So. I never really liked south beach or LA.

Think of all the dive site opportunities.. including my mothers house.. one block from the Atlantic Ocean at 5 feet above sea level... for now