Why it's pointless to debate climate change with dumb Conservatives

[gwb-trading]

and this women from that list

Anita Gale


I think she is an expert.........bathroom janitor. She knows about gasses. LOL

Let's just poke fun at all the scientists. All of them are far more accomplished than you. But it is not really hard to be more accomplished than a retarded parrot.

Anita Gale has three patents. Do you have any patents?

http://www.nss.org/about/bios/gale.html

 

[piezoe]

Jem, see for example:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/mutationrecord/#previouspost

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/12/in-a-vat-primor/#previouspost

Some pretty fascinating developments.

 

[exGOPer]

What does anything in this article have to do with "Climate Change".

Particularly this - – insisted that there is no evidence for a human influence on the carbon cycle

Most of the "deniers" of Climate Change are people with scientific backgrounds who looked at the evidence from the global warming alarmists - and determined that AGW is not proven and the 'science' put forward by the promoters basically undermines the integrity of the entire scientific community.

The "deniers" include scientific Nobel prize winners and the heads of Climate Departments at major U.S. science universities such as Georgia Tech (Dr. Judith Curry) and MIT.

Very few "deniers" support things such as 'intelligent design' or 'creationism'. You trying to tie this nonsense to the rejection of AGW simply demonstrates how far you have diverged from reality.

Did you miss what the Texas board of education (we are not talking individuals here) are doing? They are lumping evolution and climate change into the same category of 'unsettled' science.

As for Judith Curry, she has the agnostic position on climate change without ANY data to back up what she is saying. Science is about data, not opinions.

 

[exGOPer]

exgoper... you are on the side of propaganda not science


does science have proof man made co2 causes warming.
does science have any proof that non life evolved in life here on earth?
does science even have a complete plausible pathway.

If you were on the side of science you would know that once life was formed there has been evolution but there is no proof that life evolved from non life here on earth.

So stop mixing propaganda and science you leftists have polluted science enough already.

Oh look, it's the skewed poll guy again, you show me the Romney landslide first before I take any of your other drivel seriously.

 

[jem]

yes... thanks.

Jem, see for example:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/mutationrecord/#previouspost

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/12/in-a-vat-primor/#previouspost

Some pretty fascinating developments.

 

[jem]

you are a professional troll no wonder you left the gop to become a leftist. handouts and the govt trough that is your calling.

you follow the leftist troll playbook.
make ridiculous statement... when presented with facts or logic... go for the personal attack. you are a pathetic troll.

Oh look, it's the skewed poll guy again, you show me the Romney landslide first before I take any of your other drivel seriously.

 

[exGOPer]

you are a professional troll loser no wonder you left the gop.

The guy who insulted everyone for months for simply posting scientific polls is calling others troll.

Where is President Romney troll? Why aren't you apologizing for insulting liberals for all the name calling that you did for months? Do you want me to copy paste what you wrote?

 

[gwb-trading]

As for Judith Curry, she has the agnostic position on climate change without ANY data to back up what she is saying. Science is about data, not opinions.

Dr. Judith Curry has written a large number of peer reviewed papers on the climate - all complete with data.

Can you ask Dr. Mann to produce the data to back up his hockey stick assertions. You know, the data he refuses to release.

 

[jem]

going for the attack again... with lies. I did not insult everyone for months. my rant was against the media's slanted polls.... which I predicted they would adjust by election time and they did.

whether romney won or not... is irrelevant I hoped he would win but the point was some of those early polls were over sampling democrats by 10 or more points. The race was tight the whole time when you ran the polls through a proper filter... the previous race templates. The victory came about because Axelrod and the IRS and the fact Romney did not defend himself and come out for conservative principles suppressed the Romney vote.

Something unlikely to happen this November.

The guy who insulted everyone for months for simply posting scientific polls is calling others troll.

Where is President Romney troll? Why aren't you apologizing for insulting liberals for all the name calling that you did for months? Do you want me to copy paste what you wrote?

 

[exGOPer]

going for the attack again... with lies. I did not insult everyone for months. my rant was against the media's slanted polls.... which I predicted they would adjust by election time and they did.

whether romney won or not... is irrelevant I hoped he would win but the point was some of those early polls were over sampling democrats by 10 or more points. The race was tight the whole time when you ran the polls through a proper filter... the previous race templates.

The polls were accurate, PPP predicted the outcome to a tee.

Nate Silver was super accurate, you called him names and insulted him

Do you want me to QUOTE them? I would be happy to do them.

You can't run away from your past, no matter how much you try.

The excuses you are giving about 'templates' is the exact same thing Dick Morris did, the difference is that he apologized and you haven't yet.