97% consensus fake news

Heated discussions on a hot topic.
User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:28 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:What evidence do you have of evolution other than that provided by Authority?
You are either clueless are desperate to both re-direct the question.

Regards evolution start with fossils. Ive visited many sites.

Now answer the question and stay on topic. What evidence do you have that CO2 has caused recent climate change?
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:32 pm

We've all seen fossils. Hoomans have been collecting them and philosophizing about them for 1000's of years. I have a favorite ammonite I collected myself. What does that have to do with Evolution? ===>except the authority of Darwin?

You have very limited insight.

Bad Jimbo.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Mon Jan 08, 2018 10:44 pm

Still dodging the question boobo!

What evidence do you have that CO2 has caused recent climate change?
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 09, 2018 4:08 pm

I'm out.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:03 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I'm out.
Good answer
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1188
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Cadmusteeth » Tue Jan 09, 2018 9:18 pm

He didn't loose much backing out of this farce.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Mon Jan 15, 2018 3:17 am

Well good to see not a single person can refute my evidence that Oreskes method of measuring consensus it bunk!
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Jan 15, 2018 3:36 am

No Link: you're on the Blink. Dim Jim.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:27 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:No Link: you're on the Blink. Dim Jim.
Oreskes study is bunk,& that's a slam dunk!


Image
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3593
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Lausten » Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:40 pm

Cadmusteeth wrote:The authorities you use are usually ideological driven and use faulty science. At this point it's been shown that you're in denial of where evidence points to despite many threads worth of discussion.
4 years of it. Pyrrho made the right choice. Facts, logic, science, nothing works on Jimmy boy. There's nothing he can't redefine into meaninglessness. I wonder what the guy does when he's not posting here.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:29 pm

Lausten wrote:
Cadmusteeth wrote:The authorities you use are usually ideological driven and use faulty science. At this point it's been shown that you're in denial of where evidence points to despite many threads worth of discussion.
4 years of it. Pyrrho made the right choice. Facts, logic, science, nothing works on Jimmy boy. There's nothing he can't redefine into meaninglessness. I wonder what the guy does when he's not posting here.
Lausten returns with more meaninglessness insults and no science. Indeed things never change.

Please.... Lausten or Cad... what is the evidence you embrace that shows observed climate change is driven en by CO2 and not natural????

Not a single person here has provided an answer.

Instead they find some excuse, or engage in personal attacks.

Its quite funny that on a forum for skeptical thinking, the only people who engage in critical thinking get attacked, while most encourage everyone to drink the kool-ade. Fascinating!
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1188
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Cadmusteeth » Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:38 pm

For anyone interested. (This is the first in a series.)

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22159
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:52 pm

No reason to respond directly to Little Jimmy. Just make the actual information available so people can compare it to Jimmy's fake news.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"
WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:15 am

Cad, your video starts out trying to be objective but drifts into supporting a more one-sided perspective.

Greenhouse gases have BOTH a warming effect and a cooling effect.

Furthermore although CO2 absorbs very specific wavelengths of infrared (IR), wavelengths of IR (primarily 15 microns), many other wavelength escape unimpeded back t space. CO2 randomly emits the energy it absorbs within a thousandth of a second, and thus half of the absorbed IR is re-directed back to space. The resulting warming of the earth surface, continues to radiated the full spectrum of wavelengths, and thus emits a significant portion of IR in wavelengths that can escape freely back to space as wavelengths CO2 does not re-absorb.

The linked graph shows what atmospheric molecules absorb IR. Top panels shows wavelengths transmitted from the sun (left) and earth (right). The earth is cooler than sun, so earth only emits wavelengths between ~4 and 70 microns (infrared). The lower panels show which atmospheric molecules absorb IR. Nitrogen does not absorb or emit any of those wavelengths, nor dose oxygen. There is an "atmospheric window between 8 and 14 microns where IR of those wavelengths can pass freely to space at the speed of light!

Simple diatomic molecules don’t absorb or emit IR. Diatomic molecules like Nitrogen and Oxygen, that comprise 98% of the atmosphere, do not absorb or emit IR. For those molecules to cool the molecules must transfer heat to the ground that can then re-emit the heat in wavelengths that will escape through those atmospheric windows, OR, collide with a greenhouse gas which in turn can then re-emmit the IR into space. So it is theoretically possible that more CO2 which enhances collisions with nitrogen and Oxygen will cool the air.

Image
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3593
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Lausten » Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:19 am

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:
Cadmusteeth wrote:The authorities you use are usually ideological driven and use faulty science. At this point it's been shown that you're in denial of where evidence points to despite many threads worth of discussion.
4 years of it. Pyrrho made the right choice. Facts, logic, science, nothing works on Jimmy boy. There's nothing he can't redefine into meaninglessness. I wonder what the guy does when he's not posting here.
Lausten returns with more meaninglessness insults and no science. Indeed things never change.

Please.... Lausten or Cad... what is the evidence you embrace that shows observed climate change is driven en by CO2 and not natural????

Not a single person here has provided an answer.

Instead they find some excuse, or engage in personal attacks.

Its quite funny that on a forum for skeptical thinking, the only people who engage in critical thinking get attacked, while most encourage everyone to drink the kool-ade. Fascinating!
When someone has shown that they won't listen to reason, you don't try to be reasonable with them. All you have left Jim is that I'm not talking to you. That proves nothing. It is evidence of nothing, other than that I don't want to talk to you about climate change. Make of it what you will.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:29 am

Lausten wrote:
Jim Steele wrote:]
When someone has shown that they won't listen to reason, you don't try to be reasonable with them. All you have left Jim is that I'm not talking to you. That proves nothing. It is evidence of nothing, other than that I don't want to talk to you about climate change. Make of it what you will.
It as clear as always over the past 4 years, You will engage in sniping but not science.

You realize it can be equally said of you that it is you who refuses to listen to the evidence and reason, simply because it goes against your beliefs!

Thus what I make of it all is you and I (and others who drank the Kool Ade) will never have a scientific discussion, no matter how much peer-reviewed evidence I present
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1188
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Cadmusteeth » Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:58 pm

Gawdzilla Sama wrote:No reason to respond directly to Little Jimmy. Just make the actual information available so people can compare it to Jimmy's fake news.
Don't worry. That's why I said "For anyone interested."
I wasn't addressing him directly when I wrote that.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3593
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Lausten » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:41 pm

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:
Jim Steele wrote:]
When someone has shown that they won't listen to reason, you don't try to be reasonable with them. All you have left Jim is that I'm not talking to you. That proves nothing. It is evidence of nothing, other than that I don't want to talk to you about climate change. Make of it what you will.
It as clear as always over the past 4 years, You will engage in sniping but not science.

You realize it can be equally said of you that it is you who refuses to listen to the evidence and reason, simply because it goes against your beliefs!

Thus what I make of it all is you and I (and others who drank the Kool Ade) will never have a scientific discussion, no matter how much peer-reviewed evidence I present
We agree on one thing, that we have never had a scientific discussion. But, you make a scientific error right there, that is not evidence that we never will, nor does it say anything about how much evidence would make a difference. Of course I realize you can SAY it's me. Again, you saying things is not science. Me saying things isn't science either. We've had the discussion about what science is, and we don't see eye to eye on that. I don't know what it would take to change how you see it, but to convince me, you would need to find a few people with proper credentials and credible evidence to show me where I went wrong. Not you linking to someone else and summarizing it and telling what I should conclude, I mean people I trust showing me the same evidence you use and coming to your conclusions.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:49 pm

Jim Steele wrote: Thus what I make of it all is you and I (and others who drank the Kool Ade) will never have a scientific discussion, no matter how much peer-reviewed evidence I present
LMFTFY: Thus what I make of it all is you and I (and others who drank the Kool Ade) will never have a scientific discussion, no matter how much peer-reviewed evidence I WE present TO EACH OTHER.

You do recognize its a two way street? No???? This is where consensus evaluation is valid.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:03 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Jim Steele wrote: Thus what I make of it all is you and I (and others who drank the Kool Ade) will never have a scientific discussion, no matter how much peer-reviewed evidence I present
LMFTFY: Thus what I make of it all is you and I (and others who drank the Kool Ade) will never have a scientific discussion, no matter how much peer-reviewed evidence I WE present TO EACH OTHER.

You do recognize its a two way street? No???? This is where consensus evaluation is valid.
ROTFLMAO. How quickly you forget. Several times I have asked people to present the "evidence" that demonstrates the recent climate change is driven by CO2 and not natural variability.

So far no one has done so. So to be more accurate, its been more of a one way street. I present the scientific evidence and my interpretation with links and citations to the published evidence and in return the snipers ridicule me with "anti-science" for questioning.

As has been pointed out by those in the medical fields, it is likely half of the published articles are false. The Precautionary Principle suggests we should heed the Royal Society for scientific knowledge and "Take No one's Word for it! Science is a process, where the truth is slowly uncovered by sincere debate and critical questioning of our interpretations of the evidence. Science is denigrated by ad Homs, psychobabble and treating ideas as a popularity contest.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3593
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Lausten » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:17 pm

Jim Steele wrote: Science is denigrated by ad Homs, psychobabble and treating ideas as a popularity contest.
And yet you do just that on every other page of every thread you contribute to.

It's scary to think about what it must be like inside your head.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:25 pm

Lausten wrote:
Jim Steele wrote: Science is denigrated by ad Homs, psychobabble and treating ideas as a popularity contest.
And yet you do just that on every other page of every thread you contribute to.

It's scary to think about what it must be like inside your head.

Laussten yet more ad Homs and still no science. You seem to love sniping! Why?

Defend your views with evidence!

Lausten please quote where I denigrated the science and provide a link.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:06 pm

Jim Steele wrote: Several times I have asked people to present the "evidence" that demonstrates the recent climate change is driven by CO2 and not natural variability.

So far no one has done so.
Its a mental health issue to the degree you are not posing. what do you think the 97% consensus figure is ALL ABOUT???????????????????????????????????????????????

Its about AGW is REAL, and caused by Hoomans burning fossil fuels.

You post like an Agent of Woo. Words and direct answers have no meaning to you.

Almost, like an idiot.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:33 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: Its a mental health issue to the degree you are not posing. what do you think the 97% consensus figure is ALL ABOUT???????????????????????????????????????????????
Ahhhh more Boobo anti-science and insults.

The problem appears to be a comprehension issue for alarmists. The data shows claims of a 97% consensus is fake news and political theater. Alarmists whose total global warming beliefs are based simply on faith that 97% of the scientists agree that humans and CO2 are driving climate change, does not stand up to scientific scrutiny.

So they play shoot the messenger slinging various insults and psychobabble.

So let me repeat the evidence that started this thread detailing why for ALL meteorologists surveyed only 11% actually claimed humans were mostly responsible for observed climate change: 22%(response) X 49% (attribution).
Is the 97% climate consensus Fake News?

Meteorologists examine causes of weather change every day. Climate is the long-term change in weather. If a scientist does not understand how weather changes, he wont understand how climate changes. Meteorologists are the scientists most likely to understand if unusual weather extremes are weather or climate change. Thus they have been polled every year about climate change.

However most don’t respond. Basically three fourths of weather scientists choose NOT to get entangled in a political, non-scientific debate. In 2015 the response rate was 22%, just 32% in 2016 and in 2017 just 22%. And as true for most skeptics, most agreed climate change is happening. However the question is: What is the cause of that change?

Of 2017’s respondents, only 15% thought climate change was entirely due to humans, while 34% thought 60 to 80% could be attributed to human activity. However the survey did not separate human contributions to climate change from urbanization, deforestation, loss of wetlands or CO2 .
One fifth, or 21% thought changes were mostly or entirely natural while 8% admitted they just didn’t know.
So for ALL meteorologists surveyed only 11% actually claimed humans were mostly responsible for observed climate change: 22%(response) X 49% (attribution).

Image

The survey was done by advocates of CO2 warming at ClimateCentral https://goo.gl/zCTGea
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:29 pm

yep....shooting the messenger is how all scientists become great.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3593
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Lausten » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:19 am

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:
Jim Steele wrote: Science is denigrated by ad Homs, psychobabble and treating ideas as a popularity contest.
And yet you do just that on every other page of every thread you contribute to.

It's scary to think about what it must be like inside your head.

Laussten yet more ad Homs and still no science. You seem to love sniping! Why?

Defend your views with evidence!

Lausten please quote where I denigrated the science and provide a link.
Please show me where you didn't
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:25 am

Lausten wrote:
Jim Steele wrote:
Defend your views with evidence!

Lausten please quote where I denigrated the science and provide a link.
Please show me where you didn't
ROTFLMAO , I expected nothing less and nothing more
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3593
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Lausten » Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:02 pm

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:
Jim Steele wrote:
Defend your views with evidence!

Lausten please quote where I denigrated the science and provide a link.
Please show me where you didn't
ROTFLMAO , I expected nothing less and nothing more
You have 28 pages of saying that record lows mean global warming is not real. What more evidence do I need to show that you don't understand how evidence works?
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:17 pm

Lausten wrote: You have 28 pages of saying that record lows mean global warming is not real. What more evidence do I need to show that you don't understand how evidence works?
Well first Lausten, I suggest you read more carefully before you fling accusations. I never said record lows mean global warming is not real! I have always agreed temperatures are warmer now than during the Little Ice Age. Despite Boobo's lies, I have never argued CO2 is not a greenhouse gas or that it has some effect on climate. I just question to what degree. I definitely challenge the notion that warming is all driven by CO2, and I challenge the claim it has been catastrophic.

The public is bombarded with claims that heat waves or record highs are evidence of global warming. Alarmists often cherrypick the high records. So I try to balance that cherrypicking hype by ASKING if record cold is evidence of global cooling?

Both record cold and record hot are often caused by natural weather event and natural oscillations that alter the way heat is transported between the poles and the equator. That fact requires people to analyze and compare such natural contributions versus hypotheses blaming CO2 radiative effects.

However no one on this forum dares engage in such an analyses. No one ever presents the evidence, never mind debate, that climate change is being driven by CO2 and not other factors. The upper 10 feet of the ocean contains more heat than the entire atmosphere, so natural changes in how heat is stored, transported and ventilated from the ocean can indeed account for climate change as some researchers have demonstrated for regional climate and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Lausten, we never engage in any meaningful scientific discussion because you will simply argue " the consensus says so" and then you never look any further.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3593
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Lausten » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:38 pm

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote: You have 28 pages of saying that record lows mean global warming is not real. What more evidence do I need to show that you don't understand how evidence works?
Well first Lausten, I suggest you read more carefully before you fling accusations. I never said record lows mean global warming is not real! I have always agreed temperatures are warmer now than during the Little Ice Age. Despite Boobo's lies, I have never argued CO2 is not a greenhouse gas or that it has some effect on climate. I just question to what degree. I definitely challenge the notion that warming is all driven by CO2, and I challenge the claim it has been catastrophic.

The public is bombarded with claims that heat waves or record highs are evidence of global warming. Alarmists often cherrypick the high records. So I try to balance that cherrypicking hype by ASKING if record cold is evidence of global cooling?
I know you say that's what you say, but it's not what you say. You say in one post, then you go back to posting headlines followed by LOLs. Just like you say that no one ever presents evidence despite all the evidence that has been presented. You just keep circling back to your theories, as if they negate the evidence that was presented. You and Trump, like jello.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:31 am

Lausten wrote: I know you say that's what you say, but it's not what you say. You say in one post, then you go back to posting headlines followed by LOLs. Just like you say that no one ever presents evidence despite all the evidence that has been presented. You just keep circling back to your theories, as if they negate the evidence that was presented. You and Trump, like jello.
Well there's a word salad.

So exactly what was "all the evidence that has been presented"?????

Remember consensus is not evidence.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1188
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Cadmusteeth » Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:55 am

It's how that consensus came to that conclusion that global warming is happening.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 32202
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Gord » Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:57 am

Mmm, I sure could go for some orange jello right about now.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE
Is Trump in jail yet?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:59 am

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote: ......... Just like you say that no one ever presents evidence despite all the evidence that has been presented. You just keep circling back to your theories, as if they negate the evidence that was presented. ........
Jim Steele wrote:So exactly what was "all the evidence that has been presented"?????
I see what you did there. It would be humorous coming from anyone else, but pathology is never something to laugh at.....except sardonically.............with tears.
Jim Steele wrote:Remember consensus is not evidence.
Bad Jimbo. NO!!!!!!! You are supposed to remember the evidence against your position .... and that you ignored to begin with just to make your post to begin with.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:11 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote: I see what you did there. .
Cant remember what has never been posted.

Maybe Mr Two-faced-No_Links has a link to prove me wrong????
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:16 am

Cadmusteeth wrote:It's how that consensus came to that conclusion that global warming is happening.
Indeed. A consensus totally built on FAKE NEWS. Only 20-30% respond to surveys of which between 45 and 60% agree humans caused climate change. Thus .3 times .6 give us a maximum of 18% ever agreeing with the CO2 meme and

VOILA. there's your 97% consensus. ROTFLMAO

Sadly FAKE NEWS can drive the slow witted to think we are all gonna die!
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:17 am

Well, you see Bad Jimbo, after the 30th time that you ignore evidence presented to you, your request for evidence kinda rings hollow. Now.......only an idiot would play this game with you.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:25 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Well, you see Bad Jimbo, after the 30th time that you ignore evidence presented to you, your request for evidence kinda rings hollow. Now.......only an idiot would play this game with you.
Well hello Idgits!

Nice gambit boobo, but again no one has provided evidence that recent climate change is due to CO2 and NOT natural variability.

Idgits can't reproduce what they have never ever produced.

My prediction-

Boobo will post twenty+ times without ever a link that the evidence has already been presented, instead of one post with a link showing the evidence.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 14863
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jan 23, 2018 2:33 am

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic

Re: 97% consensus fake news

Post by Jim Steele » Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:08 am

Need to be more specific!
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo