Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)

[stew-STR160]

gadgetmac said:

stew-STR160 said:

LoonyTunes said:

stew-STR160 said:

LoonyTunes said:

So quote a sample from the hundreds of thousands of members of scientific institutions worldwide.

Of which a large majority of those institutions are subscription paid for memberships. Being associated with such an institution helps careers develop etc. That's the point of it.

So it's some kind of global conspiracy (as those Institutions are from all four corners of the globe) for Scientists to keep quiet about AGW in order to further their careers?

Publish false data if it conflicts with the consensus etc...

Are you on my list? Only I think I see an opening.

Seriously? Are you really that dumb?

Where was conspiracy mentioned or hinted in my comment? It wasn't.
If you are unable to comprehend that not every member, paid for subscription or otherwise, of every institution does not necessarily agree with a political viewpoint of that ogranisation, then you really need some help.

You're asking for data which belongs in the science thread, of which there appears to be plenty, if you are able to draw yourself away from creating another list...
I won't hold my breath.

It’s been made quite clear by him and others that you don’t need to mention the word conspiracy to infer its what you mean. Your argument can lead nowhere else.

Back to my lunch.

What is inferred by the alarmist cult is laughable.

Let's look at this another way shall we- Every single institution listed by LT, and every single member(free/paid for/etc), agrees 100% with the official political position of the institution?

Is this what is being suggested with the constant lists?

[With This Staff]

Confirmation bias.

[robinessex]

El stovey said:

wc98 said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

how about proving your understanding is superior, you attack his credibility, yet provide no proof of yours. Come on, put up or shut up.

he won't bite, knows you have him beat in the qualifications stakes. i am surprised though, gadgetloonymactunes likes lists. maybe he only likes it when his list is the longest.

You deniers are the the only ones who need to show your scientific credentials (or proof The scientific consensus is wrong) because you’re the ones disagreeing with the scientific community and the overwhelming majority of scientists and all the reputable scientific institutions.

It’s not really difficult.

If you’re on here saying science is broken and scientists are on the take and making stuff up and scientific institutions are wrong then you need to prove it and change the consensus.

The fact that the most vocal of you appear to have no proof of your assertions, no relevant qualifications or relevant jobs or even jobs all, makes this unlikely.

Simply put, who is going to believe you lot over a list of all the reputable scientific organisations on the planet.

There’s an overwhelming scientific consensus over AGW. If you think it’s wrong, then prove it and change the consensus.

Many holes have been shot through AGW & CC here, and you don't need any science to do that. You just ignore it, so it's really rather pointless. Dare I mention chaotic system again.? Makes climate models bks. How about the planet temperature rise of 1.0C in the last 100 years. Anyone notice it? Opps. The number of trees on the planet miscounted by a factor of 10. The recently discovered planet temperature gathering crap, probably organised by Basil Fawlty. The countless predictions that didn’t happen.

[With This Staff]

Can't manage to take the planet's temperature accurately yet.

2/3 of which there is no historical measurement of whatsoever

Call me sceptical - yes I am.

[kayc]

robinessex said:

Many holes have been shot through AGW & CC here, and you don't need any science to do that. You just ignore it, so it's really rather pointless. Dare I mention chaotic system again.? Makes climate models bks. How about the planet temperature rise of 1.0C in the last 100 years. Anyone notice it? Opps. The number of trees on the planet miscounted by a factor of 10. The recently discovered planet temperature gathering crap, probably organised by Basil Fawlty. The countless predictions that didn’t happen.

Got to to love Al Gore for the best quote ever....2007.."the North Pole is falling of a cliff and could completely be gone in seven years time"..it actually increased by 43% in the same period ..totally ridiculous but good luck to him hes worth a few quid.

[LoonyTunes]

stew-STR160 said:

gadgetmac said:

stew-STR160 said:

LoonyTunes said:

stew-STR160 said:

LoonyTunes said:

So quote a sample from the hundreds of thousands of members of scientific institutions worldwide.

Of which a large majority of those institutions are subscription paid for memberships. Being associated with such an institution helps careers develop etc. That's the point of it.

So it's some kind of global conspiracy (as those Institutions are from all four corners of the globe) for Scientists to keep quiet about AGW in order to further their careers?

Publish false data if it conflicts with the consensus etc...

Are you on my list? Only I think I see an opening.

Seriously? Are you really that dumb?

Where was conspiracy mentioned or hinted in my comment? It wasn't.
If you are unable to comprehend that not every member, paid for subscription or otherwise, of every institution does not necessarily agree with a political viewpoint of that ogranisation, then you really need some help.

You're asking for data which belongs in the science thread, of which there appears to be plenty, if you are able to draw yourself away from creating another list...
I won't hold my breath.

It’s been made quite clear by him and others that you don’t need to mention the word conspiracy to infer its what you mean. Your argument can lead nowhere else.

Back to my lunch.

What is inferred by the alarmist cult is laughable.

Let's look at this another way shall we- Every single institution listed by LT, and every single member(free/paid for/etc), agrees 100% with the official political position of the institution?

Is this what is being suggested with the constant lists?

Nope, that's not what is being said at all.

What's being said is that the majority of Climate Scientists at those institutions agree with AGW.

I offer one example, Richard Lindzen ex-MIT. He wrote to the Trump urging him to effectively ignore AGW as it wasn't true.

22 Climate related Scientists from MIT immediately wrote an open letter to the President saying that was not what the rest of them thought. Lindzen was an outlier.

So, here's the same offer to you as to wc98 - quote me an instance where the reverse has happened or been shown to be true. That a majority of Scientists/Researchers/Professors at an Institute or other Scientific Body (Uni's included) disagree with their own Institutes stance on AGW.

I'll take any 6 examples from the thousands worldwide.

Because if you can't name some then your argument that they are all scared to disagree for some reason is a conspiracy argument as they would have to collude with other institutes with whom they share data and scientific investigations to keep this facade going. Scientists (and Scientific Bodys) do not live in a vacuum.

Over to you but I'll bet you - like wc - can't name any.

[dickymint]

Shift change again? Understandable really, Loon must be knackered bless him.

Who’s next out from under the bridge?

[LoonyTunes]

dickymint said:

Shift change again? Understandable really, Loon must be knackered bless him.

Who’s next out from under the bridge?

MintyDick in 'no input shocker'

"Back under your bridge troll".

[With This Staff]

LoonyTunes said:

dickymint said:

Shift change again? Understandable really, Loon must be knackered bless him.

Who’s next out from under the bridge?

MintyDick in 'no input shocker'

"Back under your bridge troll".

Slightly more polite than battering those that you presume to be idiots about the head with a wooden spoon!

[jet_noise]

durbster said:

PRTVR said:

durbster said:

PRTVR said:

I do occasionally, it's fun with my Greenpeace card carrying friends, what's surprising is how little they actually understand about it and quickly default to an appeal to authority.

https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/...
We are not alone.. one in 5 Australians believe climate change is a hoax.

Of course. The propaganda engine has been running for some time and many have fallen for it.

agreed, the worlds going to end in 5,10,15 or even 50 years if we do not do something about CO2, just had a look outside and thankfully it hasn't happened yet even with all the terrible predictions.

And there we go.

One of many strawman arguments you've got from the aforementioned propaganda.

That's a particularly flammable strawperson, already burnt to a crisp by ice age/global warming/climate change/climate/chaos/hothouse earth*.

<Host in eye catching sparkly jacket and microskirt>
Welcome to Climatewang!
How long till the earth burns in a fiery ball?
Fingers on buzzards, lets PLAY!

10 years (March 2017)
100 months (Aug 2008)
5 years (May 2007)
7 years (July 2008)

*Select current meme. Select all that apply.

[jshell]

stew-STR160 said:

wc98 said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

how about proving your understanding is superior, you attack his credibility, yet provide no proof of yours. Come on, put up or shut up.

he won't bite, knows you have him beat in the qualifications stakes. i am surprised though, gadgetloonymactunes likes lists. maybe he only likes it when his list is the longest.

Unless it's list based, he doesn't seem able to respond to much.

I'm genuinely surprised you guys even respond to him. He's loving this and has most of you wound right up!

Do not feed the.....

[stew-STR160]

LoonyTunes said:

Nope, that's not what is being said at all.

What's being said is that the majority of Climate Scientists at those institutions agree with AGW.

I offer one example, Richard Lindzen ex-MIT. He wrote to the Trump urging him to effectively ignore AGW as it wasn't true.

22 Climate related Scientists from MIT immediately wrote an open letter to the President saying that was not what the rest of them thought. Lindzen was an outlier.

So, here's the same offer to you as to wc98 - quote me an instance where the reverse has happened or been shown to be true. That a majority of Scientists/Researchers/Professors at an Institute or other Scientific Body (Uni's included) disagree with their own Institutes stance on AGW.

I'll take any 6 examples from the thousands worldwide.

Because if you can't name some then your argument that they are all scared to disagree for some reason is a conspiracy argument as they would have to collude with other institutes with whom they share data and scientific investigations to keep this facade going. Scientists (and Scientific Bodys) do not live in a vacuum.

Over to you but I'll bet you - like wc - can't name any.

You're asking a question you basically know can't be answered because I am not in communication directly with those people or institutions.
I am not saying that X amount have stood out against the institutions.

Why do you want a majority? Why is one/two/three not sufficient? Why does it require a majority to say they are right and those in minority are wrong?

[stew-STR160]

jshell said:

stew-STR160 said:

wc98 said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

how about proving your understanding is superior, you attack his credibility, yet provide no proof of yours. Come on, put up or shut up.

he won't bite, knows you have him beat in the qualifications stakes. i am surprised though, gadgetloonymactunes likes lists. maybe he only likes it when his list is the longest.

Unless it's list based, he doesn't seem able to respond to much.

I'm genuinely surprised you guys even respond to him. He's loving this and has most of you wound right up!

Do not feed the.....

I know...I just can't grasp that either people are that dim, or genuinely have nothing better to do than troll to such a degree.

[With This Staff]

jshell said:

I'm genuinely surprised you guys even respond to him. He's loving this and has most of you wound right up!

Do not feed the.....

Carry on for educational purposes.

Ooooh matron really?

[anonymous-user]

wc98 said:

don't take es to seriously, he pops in to poke fun for a bit, not take part in any debate. he couldn't tell you the physical mechanism that will allow co2 live up to alarmist claims without googling it right now. i think turbobloke must have ran over his cat a while back and ever since he has stalked him on this thread

Your love for your spiritual leader is touching. (Probably quite literally)

Do you have to show such public deference to avoid the BBC watch duties that robinessex seems stuck with?

Is this the first cult you’ve been in? What’s the attraction? Seems a bit rubbish from the outside. Conspiracy theories and googling advocacy blogs and threatening people that call you a denier.

Wouldn’t it be better to join a walking club or the masons or something with a bit more joy and optimism?

You don’t teally believe this nonsense do you? Best tell TB you know he’s talking rubbish and get a better hobby.

[With This Staff]

Better - must try harder to be more convincing!

[jshell]

stew-STR160 said:

jshell said:

stew-STR160 said:

wc98 said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

how about proving your understanding is superior, you attack his credibility, yet provide no proof of yours. Come on, put up or shut up.

he won't bite, knows you have him beat in the qualifications stakes. i am surprised though, gadgetloonymactunes likes lists. maybe he only likes it when his list is the longest.

Unless it's list based, he doesn't seem able to respond to much.

I'm genuinely surprised you guys even respond to him. He's loving this and has most of you wound right up!

Do not feed the.....

I know...I just can't grasp that either people are that dim, or genuinely have nothing better to do than troll to such a degree.

He's not dim, he knows exactly what he is doing. By acting the clown and getting a reaction without presenting any topical discussion, he is able to pull the thread down with him. He knows that people will tune out and that is what he seeking to achieve. It's quite pre-meditated, and the responses are enabling the behaviour.

You can see that some thread contributors have already figured this out and don't respond to it.

Quite clever, I've used this method to cluster-bomb the fk out of stuff before.

[LoonyTunes]

stew-STR160 said:

jshell said:

stew-STR160 said:

wc98 said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

how about proving your understanding is superior, you attack his credibility, yet provide no proof of yours. Come on, put up or shut up.

he won't bite, knows you have him beat in the qualifications stakes. i am surprised though, gadgetloonymactunes likes lists. maybe he only likes it when his list is the longest.

Unless it's list based, he doesn't seem able to respond to much.

I'm genuinely surprised you guys even respond to him. He's loving this and has most of you wound right up!

Do not feed the.....

I know...I just can't grasp that either people are that dim, or genuinely have nothing better to do than troll to such a degree.

This from posters unable to cite a single instance of anything they believe to be true and who disagree with tens of thousands of Scientists simply because they want to.

Yes, I am loving it, who doesn't like arguments they can't lose? It's fish in a barrell. If you lot were even half as smart as you think you are maybe my enjoyment would be a little less - who knows. But you can't come up with anything that can't be smashed right out of the park.

Sorry.

[With This Staff]

Does the 'smashing out of the park' share the same emotion as 'beating idiots about the head'

[dickymint]

jshell said:

stew-STR160 said:

wc98 said:

QuantumTokoloshi said:

how about proving your understanding is superior, you attack his credibility, yet provide no proof of yours. Come on, put up or shut up.

he won't bite, knows you have him beat in the qualifications stakes. i am surprised though, gadgetloonymactunes likes lists. maybe he only likes it when his list is the longest.

Unless it's list based, he doesn't seem able to respond to much.

I'm genuinely surprised you guys even respond to him. He's loving this and has most of you wound right up!

Do not feed the.....

Not feeding him just giving him some more rope