Global warming hoax fools millions

Quote from bigdavediode:

The following standards are widely accepted:

1. The person has sufficient expertise in the subject matter <s>in question</s> AND agrees with MMGW.

2. The claim being made by the person is within her area(s) of expertise AND they agree with MMGW.

3. There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts(Only if they agree with MMGW) in the subject in question.

4. The person in question is <s>not</s> significantly biased.

5. The area of expertise is a legitimate area or discipline AND they agree with MMGW.

6. The authority in question must be identified AND agrees with MMGW.
More...
Is it just me or is this what he really meant?
 
Quote from Lucrum:

Is it just me or is this what he really meant?
More...

Now that I've explained how the appeal to authority fallacy works to Trader666, I'll let you in on a little secret: you're arguing with a textbook. I don't think you'll win.
 
Quote from bigdavediode:

...I'll let you in on a little secret: you're arguing with a textbook. I don't think you'll win.
More...
Well davie, like everyone else around here. In MY MIND, I've already won. :)
 
Quote from Ricter:

You'll be a lot happier when you put this one on ignore. I had to concede and do so myself. He's impossible.
More...

You ever had an argument with someone who thinks the moon landings were faked? It can be fun, for a while.
 
I'll let you in on a little secret, littledaviedumbass... you misunderstood the textbook you plagiarized because you're a dumbass and you didn't read far enough. Not that textbooks are always correct anyway. Yet another fallacious argument from the "big fan of logic." :p
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2979342#post2979342

But what else would we expect from the one who doesn't even understand basic graphs and axes?
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2974933&#post2974933

P.S. Instead of "I don't think you'll win" you should have written "I don't think. You'll win."
Quote from bigdavediode:

I'll let you in on a little secret: you're arguing with a textbook. I don't think you'll win.
More...
 
Quote from Trader666:

I'll let you in on a little secret, littledaviedumbass... you misunderstood the textbook you plagiarized because you're a dumbass and you didn't read far enough. Not that textbooks are always correct anyway. Yet another fallacious argument from the "big fan of logic." :p
More...

Look at it this way, maybe there's someone reading who's so profoundly stupid that they buy your nonsense. Keep that hope alive, my friend.
 
Misstating even the basics, fallacious reasoning, lying and plagiarism didn't help you... projection won't either. You really should consider getting an education or learning a trade instead of wasting your time spewing bullshit on ET.
Quote from bigdavediode:

Look at it this way, maybe there's someone reading who's so profoundly stupid that they buy your nonsense. Keep that hope alive, my friend.
More...
 
NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blo...-192334971.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top