Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)

[Diderot]

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

Murph7355 said:

gadgetmac said:

How would asking an individual pilot to stop flying help the situation? Is he asking you or anyone else to give up driving?

Does he build the aircraft himself?

Should all of the pro AGW taxi drivers to stop ferrying people around for a living?

Maybe we can ask pro AGW Ambulance drivers to give it a rest while we're at it?

This is a ridiculous argument.

Taxing stuff and "carbon credits" etc aren't doing anything material about it IMO. .

Great cash generating scheme for big polluters though; TATA Steel, ring any bells Gadgetmac?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-359...

Yeah.

1. That you never explained what the fk you were going on about

2. You got me and LoonyTunes mixed up

Professor.

So you're not Loony/GM/Stovey, just GM/Stovey?

In the same way that you're not a professor/flat earther just a flat earther

Er, no. I don’t believe the earth is flat.

You don’t need to, it’s a metaphor.

I don’t believe the earth is flat.

Do you understand the concept of non sequitur? (Rhetorical question).

I see your "PhD" doesn't help with Analogies then prof.

It's not an analogy or a metaphor; it's just a cheap, hackneyed and ultimately pathetic failed strategy to denigrate those who hold a position that you disagree with. It just serves to demonstrate that you can't really think for yourself.

[robinessex]

My grandkids ages 7 to 13, know flat earthers are loonies! They also know how to debate a subject.

[turbobloke]

]

robinessex said:

My grandkids ages 7 to 13, know flat earthers are loonies! They also know how to debate a subject.

Irony Of The Day: the Flat Earth Society has tweeted belief in manmade climate change,because there's so much evidence (and that society should know about such things)

[gadgetmac]

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

Murph7355 said:

gadgetmac said:

How would asking an individual pilot to stop flying help the situation? Is he asking you or anyone else to give up driving?

Does he build the aircraft himself?

Should all of the pro AGW taxi drivers to stop ferrying people around for a living?

Maybe we can ask pro AGW Ambulance drivers to give it a rest while we're at it?

This is a ridiculous argument.

Taxing stuff and "carbon credits" etc aren't doing anything material about it IMO. .

Great cash generating scheme for big polluters though; TATA Steel, ring any bells Gadgetmac?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-359...

Yeah.

1. That you never explained what the fk you were going on about

2. You got me and LoonyTunes mixed up

Professor.

So you're not Loony/GM/Stovey, just GM/Stovey?

In the same way that you're not a professor/flat earther just a flat earther

Er, no. I don’t believe the earth is flat.

You don’t need to, it’s a metaphor.

I don’t believe the earth is flat.

Do you understand the concept of non sequitur? (Rhetorical question).

I see your "PhD" doesn't help with Analogies then prof.

It's not an analogy or a metaphor; it's just a cheap, hackneyed and ultimately pathetic failed strategy to denigrate those who hold a position that you every scientific institution in the world, every Government (bar the current US administration) and 97% of climate scientists disagree with. It just serves to demonstrate that I really am hanging out with the other cultists on this.

FTFY

[gadgetmac]

turbobloke] said:

robinessex said:

My grandkids ages 7 to 13, know flat earthers are loonies! They also know how to debate a subject.

Irony Of The Day: the Flat Earth Society has tweeted belief in manmade climate change,because there's so much evidence (and that society should know about such things)

Wow you really are out on your own now. Well, you and the alien abductionists.

[gadgetmac]

turbobloke said:

The political blog Climate Depot shows Greenpeace co-founder Dr Moore being Trumpeted in a tweet..

How many times have you done Patrick Moore?

The pool really is shallow isn't it.

And qouting Trump

This is the President who said Global Warming was invented by the Chinese to do harm to America.

The same President who dismissed a study produced by his own administration, involving 13 federal agencies and more than 300 leading climate scientists, warning of the potentially catastrophic impact of climate change.

“I don’t believe it,” said Trump after reading a small portion of it.

It figures that he would be a go-to guy for you though.

[Diderot]

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

Murph7355 said:

gadgetmac said:

How would asking an individual pilot to stop flying help the situation? Is he asking you or anyone else to give up driving?

Does he build the aircraft himself?

Should all of the pro AGW taxi drivers to stop ferrying people around for a living?

Maybe we can ask pro AGW Ambulance drivers to give it a rest while we're at it?

This is a ridiculous argument.

Taxing stuff and "carbon credits" etc aren't doing anything material about it IMO. .

Great cash generating scheme for big polluters though; TATA Steel, ring any bells Gadgetmac?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-359...

Yeah.

1. That you never explained what the fk you were going on about

2. You got me and LoonyTunes mixed up

Professor.

So you're not Loony/GM/Stovey, just GM/Stovey?

In the same way that you're not a professor/flat earther just a flat earther

Er, no. I don’t believe the earth is flat.

You don’t need to, it’s a metaphor.

I don’t believe the earth is flat.

Do you understand the concept of non sequitur? (Rhetorical question).

I see your "PhD" doesn't help with Analogies then prof.

It's not an analogy or a metaphor; it's just a cheap, hackneyed and ultimately pathetic failed strategy to denigrate those who hold a position that you every scientific institution in the world, every Government (bar the current US administration) and 97% of climate scientists disagree with. It just serves to demonstrate that I really am hanging out with the other cultists on this.

FTFY

You really are a card. Every scientific institution in the world? Oh really? Have you checked the position of every single one? And don't keep banging on about the mythical 97% consensus - does you even fewer favours than your incessant recourse to the 'flat earther' rubbish. Anyone would think you're a troll. Oh wait.

[gadgetmac]

Diderot said:

You really are a card. Every scientific institution in the world? Oh really? Have you checked the position of every single one? And don't keep banging on about the mythical 97% consensus - does you even fewer favours than your incessant recourse to the 'flat earther' rubbish. Anyone would think you're a troll. Oh wait.

Well faux-pro, start naming some scientific institutions that don't believe in AGW.

It's been asked a thousand times before on this thread and never got a single reply.

Get started. I'll wait. And remember, the Heartland Institute funded by big oil doesn't count.

[gadgetmac]

Don't like 97%?

Well I'll take NASA's website as my source for that. "Multiple studies published in peer reviewed scientific journals show that 97% OR MORE of actively publishing climate scientists agree".

Does the GWPF disagree then?

[robinessex]

gadgetmac said:

Don't like 97%?

Well I'll take NASA's website as my source for that. "Multiple studies published in peer reviewed scientific journals show that 97% OR MORE of actively publishing climate scientists agree".

Does the GWPF disagree then?

Reading something, and then agreeing with it isn't science. Or didn't you know that?

[gadgetmac]

robinessex said:

gadgetmac said:

Don't like 97%?

Well I'll take NASA's website as my source for that. "Multiple studies published in peer reviewed scientific journals show that 97% OR MORE of actively publishing climate scientists agree".

Does the GWPF disagree then?

Reading something, and then agreeing with it isn't science. Or didn't you know that?

Yeah sorry, I don't have my own lab and facilities in the Arctic to do the research myself.

You realise that that you just nullified 97% of your dear leaders posts right?




ETA: You also realise that reading something (ie The BBC science page),'and then disagreeing with it with zero evidence or climate science credentials yourself is even less science. Or didn't you know this?

Edited by gadgetmac on Wednesday 13th March 11:42

[zygalski]

robinessex said:

Reading something, and then agreeing with it isn't science. Or didn't you know that?

Unless of course it's posted on WUWT.

[robinessex]

gadgetmac said:

robinessex said:

gadgetmac said:

Don't like 97%?

Well I'll take NASA's website as my source for that. "Multiple studies published in peer reviewed scientific journals show that 97% OR MORE of actively publishing climate scientists agree".

Does the GWPF disagree then?

Reading something, and then agreeing with it isn't science. Or didn't you know that?

Yeah sorry, I don't have my own lab and facilities in the Arctic to do the research myself.

You realise that that you just nullified 97% of your dear leaders posts right?




ETA: You also realise that reading something (ie The BBC science page),'and then disagreeing with it with zero evidence or climate science credentials yourself is even less science. Or didn't you know this?

Edited by gadgetmac on Wednesday 13th March 11:42

I was referring to the supposed 97% of consensus by other Scientists. Read what I said correctly next time.

[anonymous-user]

robinessex said:

I was referring to the supposed 97% of consensus by other Scientists. Read what I said correctly next time.

Perhaps get your grandkids to give you some tips on debating Robinessex?

[wc98]

gadgetmac said:

On those points we agree.

[wc98]

turbobloke said:

Data says Japanese winters are cool, Finland is getting even cooler, Great Lakes ice grows,California snow pack hits a record and water level ('permanent drought') equalled the State's all-time record (JMA, NOAA, CDWR)

Meanwhile guess what the alarmist gigoesque agw predictions were/are...no detail is needed, 'wrong as usual' will do.

maybe next year

[London424]

gadgetmac said:

turbobloke said:

The political blog Climate Depot shows Greenpeace co-founder Dr Moore being Trumpeted in a tweet..

How many times have you done Patrick Moore?

The pool really is shallow isn't it.

And qouting Trump

This is the President who said Global Warming was invented by the Chinese to do harm to America.

The same President who dismissed a study produced by his own administration, involving 13 federal agencies and more than 300 leading climate scientists, warning of the potentially catastrophic impact of climate change.

“I don’t believe it,” said Trump after reading a small portion of it.

It figures that he would be a go-to guy for you though.

Aren't you even a little concerned that rather than fess up and just say that they now have differences of opinion etc they tried to claim that he was never a founder of the organisation. They went and changed their website etc etc.

Unfortunately for them the internet never forgets and it just looks like a cover up, when many claims exist about the changing of historical data.

It's not exactly a good look is it?

[gadgetmac]

London424 said:

gadgetmac said:

turbobloke said:

The political blog Climate Depot shows Greenpeace co-founder Dr Moore being Trumpeted in a tweet..

How many times have you done Patrick Moore?

The pool really is shallow isn't it.

And qouting Trump

This is the President who said Global Warming was invented by the Chinese to do harm to America.

The same President who dismissed a study produced by his own administration, involving 13 federal agencies and more than 300 leading climate scientists, warning of the potentially catastrophic impact of climate change.

“I don’t believe it,” said Trump after reading a small portion of it.

It figures that he would be a go-to guy for you though.

Aren't you even a little concerned that rather than fess up and just say that they now have differences of opinion etc they tried to claim that he was never a founder of the organisation. They went and changed their website etc etc.

Unfortunately for them the internet never forgets and it just looks like a cover up, when many claims exist about the changing of historical data.

It's not exactly a good look is it?

You are right, the internet never forgets.

Greenpeace say:

Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cotes, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year. A copy of his application letter and Greenpeace’s response are available here (PDF).

The PDF in question is available on Greenpeaces website and is a hand written letter to Greenpeace applying for a position on their ship protesting the nuclear testing to be done by the US Atomic Energy Commission.

He goes on to explain that he is currently a graduate student at UBC working towards a PhD.

It's 100% conclusive that at that point Greenpeace existed and that he wasn't a member.

Again, this is fake news surrounding the credentials of a denier who has decided to take big oil's coin.

Do you have any contrary evidence?

[London424]

gadgetmac said:

London424 said:

gadgetmac said:

turbobloke said:

The political blog Climate Depot shows Greenpeace co-founder Dr Moore being Trumpeted in a tweet..

How many times have you done Patrick Moore?

The pool really is shallow isn't it.

And qouting Trump

This is the President who said Global Warming was invented by the Chinese to do harm to America.

The same President who dismissed a study produced by his own administration, involving 13 federal agencies and more than 300 leading climate scientists, warning of the potentially catastrophic impact of climate change.

“I don’t believe it,” said Trump after reading a small portion of it.

It figures that he would be a go-to guy for you though.

Aren't you even a little concerned that rather than fess up and just say that they now have differences of opinion etc they tried to claim that he was never a founder of the organisation. They went and changed their website etc etc.

Unfortunately for them the internet never forgets and it just looks like a cover up, when many claims exist about the changing of historical data.

It's not exactly a good look is it?

You are right, the internet never forgets.

Greenpeace say:

Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cotes, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year. A copy of his application letter and Greenpeace’s response are available here (PDF).

The PDF in question is available on Greenpeaces website and is a hand written letter to Greenpeace applying for a position on their ship protesting the nuclear testing to be done by the US Atomic Energy Commission.

He goes on to explain that he is currently a graduate student at UBC working towards a PhD.

It's 100% conclusive that at that point Greenpeace existed and that he wasn't a member.

Again, this is fake news surrounding the credentials of a denier who has decided to take big oil's coin.

Do you have any contrary evidence?

From their old webpages...since changed.

http://web.archive.org/web/20021119050900/http://w...

The Wiki page even references it.

Edited by London424 on Wednesday 13th March 17:08

[gadgetmac]

London424 said:

gadgetmac said:

London424 said:

gadgetmac said:

turbobloke said:

The political blog Climate Depot shows Greenpeace co-founder Dr Moore being Trumpeted in a tweet..

How many times have you done Patrick Moore?

The pool really is shallow isn't it.

And qouting Trump

This is the President who said Global Warming was invented by the Chinese to do harm to America.

The same President who dismissed a study produced by his own administration, involving 13 federal agencies and more than 300 leading climate scientists, warning of the potentially catastrophic impact of climate change.

“I don’t believe it,” said Trump after reading a small portion of it.

It figures that he would be a go-to guy for you though.

Aren't you even a little concerned that rather than fess up and just say that they now have differences of opinion etc they tried to claim that he was never a founder of the organisation. They went and changed their website etc etc.

Unfortunately for them the internet never forgets and it just looks like a cover up, when many claims exist about the changing of historical data.

It's not exactly a good look is it?

You are right, the internet never forgets.

Greenpeace say:

Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cotes, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year. A copy of his application letter and Greenpeace’s response are available here (PDF).

The PDF in question is available on Greenpeaces website and is a hand written letter to Greenpeace applying for a position on their ship protesting the nuclear testing to be done by the US Atomic Energy Commission.

He goes on to explain that he is currently a graduate student at UBC working towards a PhD.

It's 100% conclusive that at that point Greenpeace existed and that he wasn't a member.

Again, this is fake news surrounding the credentials of a denier who has decided to take big oil's coin.

Do you have any contrary evidence?

From their old webpages...since changed.

http://web.archive.org/web/20021119050900/http://w...

The Wiki page even references it.

You know there's a difference between a founder and a first member right?

And to back that point up read his letter asking to join a Greenpeace demonstration from his current position at UBC

Come on London...Why would you ask to join a committee that you founded?

How could he have founded an organisation that had already been in existence for over a year?