Search results

Another example: In response to drj about cosmic rays and their effects on temp for a time scale in the hundreds of years, Dave responds by mentioning solar cycles, which have a cycle of 11 years. Again, irrelevant by Dave's standards, but it doesn't seem to apply to him.

case in point: Dave responds to a statement that Antarctic ice has been increasing since the 70's with an article that deals with only 3 years. By his own standards, this is irrelevant. But somehow, this standard doesn't apply to the MMGW believers.

You're insane cuz after repeatedly saying that just a single year, or only a few years means nothing, you pull up numbers from the VERY recent past. Only a moron or a liar would do that and not look at the bulk of the situation. But this is exactly what you do ALSO when it regards MMGW...

Yup. http://www.space.com/images/suncycle_temps_0108_02.gif The sun heats the earth = more water vapor. Water vapor is a GG that IPCC ignores.

I now see why you're unable to understand that there is no consensus on MMGW. You're insane.

LMAO. You're getting your ass handed to you. Why don't you just end your humiliation now and quit proving to everyone how stupid you are? Oops... cars were the solution for horseshit..... too late.

And by your numbers, 29% believe that GW is natural..... Are you gonna call them cultists? Now you can't, can you, cuz by your own standards, that's a main stream view. And so once again, you haven't proven a damn thing, have ya sport? Kinda painted yourself into a corner there...

IOW, you didn't refute a damn thing now, did you?

I see a couple of clear trends here. 1-Nobody even attempts to refute the fact that a whole bunch of CLIMATOLOGISTS cited in the IPCC report have requested that their name be removed, and that this clearly proves that there is no where near a concensus on the issue. And yet, they keep on...

1- Liar. I never said anything about whats-his-bucket's politics. I merely stated as fact that people lie on the internet about their politics cuz they think it will bolster their views. IOW, I'm skeptical. And by your own numbers, I have a pretty good chance of being right. 2- he's right...

1- if you include Hansen in that group, remember that NASA proved that they indeed know science very well when they declared his findings to be crap. And since much of the so called facts that you like to copy/paste are rooted in his report, they are equally crap. 2- what's your point...

Uh huh. A lot of people lie on the internet about their politics in order to try and give their views more weight.

Yup. Baseball cards.

1- not nearly enough Dave. You seem to be missing the significance of the whole term. Stalin used it describe liberals in America - mostly the very intelligent ones - as being useful idiots cuz they were suckers that didn't know that they were being conned into supporting communism. That's an...

So you admit that you're a fraud, and that in order to have responded that quickly, you have a whole list of stock answers ready to copy/paste? Face it Dave, you've destroyed your credibility yet again. Useful idiot indeed.

No, he's a joke. NASA confirmed it by declaring his findings a load of crap. You agree that NASA said he was full of it, right?

Baseball cards then, right? Cuz if you don't see a downtrend there, you're a failure.

I've read this passage just the other day. Word for word. Exactly the same. You've copy/pasted it. You're a fraud, Dave.

They understand science fine. That's why they publicly declared Hansen's findings to be a crock of shit. Hansen isn't NASA.

You've never traded a stock in your entire life, have you Dave?