Global Warming

[spook]

Yes, you have been hopelessly mannipulated.

You rail against the existence of god, yet support the existence of a mystical nonmaterial connection to a land mass by race. Have a look in your own backyard mate.

What nonsense.

 

[Nico]

Have a look for yourself.

Global Warming Petition Project

www.petitionproject.org

I did....and they are not.

Any one with a science degree (of any field) was able to sign the petition. So some snotty nosed 21yo kid who just got a science degree in Cryptography from Scumbag University is, in your view, an authority on climate change.

You also clearly forgot to mention that the petition was distributed in 1998 (22 years ago) by certified crackpot Arthur B. Robinson, and former tobacco lobbyist Frederick Seitz.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Any one with a science degree (of any field) was able to sign the petition.

Correct.

So some snotty nosed 21yo kid who just got a science degree in Cryptography from Scumbag University is, in your view, an authority on climate change.

No. Try again.

You also clearly forgot to mention that the petition was distributed in 1998 (22 years ago) by certified crackpot Arthur B. Robinson, and former tobacco lobbyist Frederick Seitz.

I'd never heard of it 12 hours ago and don't know its background. It's immaterial when its premise and the requirements for signing are stated so clearly.

 

[Baloo]

You were right l2r2, by posting that link you did take our heads. I'm still laughing my head off.

 

[spook]

It was signed by Star Wars characters and Spice Girls. Credibility in the toilet.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

It was signed by Star Wars characters and Spice Girls. Credibility in the toilet.

Suspect that if the tertiary qualifications you lot possess were collected together, there wouldn't be enough to start a fire. But you don't need a degree to hurl insults. Carry on.

 

[TT33]

Suspect that if the tertiary qualifications you lot possess were collected together, there wouldn't be enough to start a fire. But you don't need a degree to hurl insults. Carry on.

I admire your passion L2, but not your science.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

I admire your passion L2, but not your science.

Feel free to challenge my response to DavidSSSSSS, then. There is plenty of scope for proper debate.

I'm trying hard to rein in my irritation, but it's spilling over into other threads now where certain posters queue up to take a swing and accuse me of being fact-averse, when that's exactly what I'm trying to focus on, and always have. It's either swing back or remove myself from the non-football boards. I don't think of any of you as idiots but I'm not being shown the same courtesy. Excuse my occasional outburst.

 

[AngryAnt]

Correct.

No. Try again.

I'd never heard of it 12 hours ago and don't know its background. It's immaterial when its premise and the requirements for signing are stated so clearly.

So tell us more about Chewbacca's scientific work and any peer-reviewed papers he's published on the topic.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

So tell us more about Chewbacca's scientific work and any peer-reviewed papers he's published on the topic.

I can't understand what that guy says. He must be very intelligent.

 

[lukeanddad]

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate."

- signed, US scientists

Global Warming Petition Project

These people must be twats, warped, conspirators, sponsored, hypocrites, deniers, irrational, crap peddlers, fruitcakes, arrogant or possibly all of the above. And that's just from the last page of this thread.

You lot are going to tread more respectfully from now on. Or I'm going to take heads.

Thanks for posting. Took me a while to read it as I'm at work. Some in these parts must be speed readers - and highly intelligent - to have gotten through 12 pages and 26 graphs so quickly.

I'm only interested in the data that was presented, so if any of the critics have a better understanding of that (and not just the perceived credentials of the authors) I'd love to hear from them.

Fair dinkum, talk about playing the man.

 

[AngryAnt]

Fair dinkum, talk about playing the man.

Also playing the Wookie

 

[Baloo]

Good ol' Snopes. They also gave Climategate the thumbs up. May as well be reading The Guardian.
This is how people like you get manipulated. You don't read with understanding, e.g.

Climategate is something worth reading about too, not just any sensational headlines.

Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Or is Wikipedia an ALt Left site as well?

 

[spook]

Suspect that if the tertiary qualifications you lot possess were collected together, there wouldn't be enough to start a fire. But you don't need a degree to hurl insults. Carry on.

The only ones hurling insults here are you and Gia. If you'd bothered to read the Snopes article you'd see that your petition has fake signatures, including Star Wars characters and 'Dr' Geri Halliwell. The credibility of that petition is non-existent.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

The only ones hurling insults here are you and Gia. If you'd bothered to read the Snopes article you'd see that your petition has fake signatures, including Star Wars characters and 'Dr' Geri Halliwell. The credibility of that petition is non-existent.

They're all fake, are they?

Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Or is Wikipedia an ALt Left site as well?

Well-known to be left-leaning, and the Climategate article is total *smile*. For example the bit about "Mike's nature trick" explains it away as though it was nothing, but Phil Jones was very clear in his email. It is this Wikipedia version that presents things "out of context". Phil Jones and co. belong in jail.

 

[AngryAnt]

They're all fake, are they?

Well-known to be left-leaning, and the Climategate article is total *smile*. For example the bit about "Mike's nature trick" explains it away as though it was nothing, but Phil Jones was very clear in his email. It is this Wikipedia version that presents things "out of context". Phil Jones and co. belong in jail.

 

[Baloo]

Well-known to be left-leaning

Either you don't know how Wikipedia works or you're just parroting what you've read on denier sites who don't like to deal with verifiable facts.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Either you don't know how Wikipedia works or you're just parroting what you've read on denier sites who don't like to deal with verifiable facts.

Now you're just being silly.

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication Files/15-023_e044cf50-f621-4759-a827-e9a3bf8920c0.pdf

Study: Wikipedia perpetuates political bias

I'm certain we've been over this before.

 

[Coburgtiger]

I've posted this before, but if you consider evidence, education and science to be left leaning, you're going to think a lot of information sources are left leaning.

 

[Baloo]

Now you're just being silly.

I'm certain we've been over this before.

That study is purely on entries about US politcs only. Nothing else. And the bias it mentions is minor, but then there is this little nugget when comparing Enc Britannica and Wikipedia.

"The difference for a pair of articles decreases with more revisions of Wikipedia articles"

Which is natural as more people edit, update and provide resources, they will come from all sides to ensure balance.