Concensus, conshmensus. The debate rages on.

yeah that's cool but is anyone here afraid of the discussion? or are several of us just tired of the same hogwash again and again. (granted, there are two distinct versions of that hogwash currently in circulation hereabouts, neither of which is particularly compelling.)
 
2minkey said:
there's NOTHING to DEBATE when it's shit on the level of...

"vern jablonsky, over in idaho, was telling me that he thinks that coca cola is poisoning our precious body fluids with communist propaganda. ever notice all the red they use on their product? yep. so i sold my stock and called my NRA rep to let him know."

when will you understand that? ever? as soon as there is something of substance, there will be "debate." until then. it's just "bate and snicker."
Click to expand...

So the recent discovery of volcanic activity under the Arctic ice sheet is not worthy of debate?

The recent posting of over 31,000 scientists, who deny that man is the cause of GW, is not worthy of debate?

The recent study of the ocean currents which move warm water to the Arctic, and thus affect the ice sheet, is not worthy of debate?

The delay in the onset of Solar Cycle 24, and the near absence of sunspots for the past decade, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that temperatures have been flat for the past decade, with no warming whatsoever, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that global warming is occuring on extraterrestrial bodies, like Mars, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that water vapor is the most prevalent GW gas, and the fact that most GW models do not account for water vapor, is not worthy of debate?

The fact, even admitted by GW proponents, that only 5% of GW is attributed to man, and we cannot do anything about the other 95%, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there are no GW models whatsoever which take into account cloud cover, because it is impossible to predict, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that most weather stations are located in areas which have become "heat islands" is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there have been warmer periods in human history than what we are going through now is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there are now notable scientists who are predicting a near future cooling trend, and a possible mini ice age, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the GW proponents have feathered their nest with this information -- saying that there will be a cooling period for several years after which warming will continue -- is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the GW proponents decry the shrinking of the northern polar ice cap, while ignoring the current expansion of the southern ice cap, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that volcanoes, the sweat glands of the Earth, worldwide are erupting, thus shading and cooling the Earth, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the largest storehouse of CO2 is the ocean, and how to keep it there, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there have been numerous falsehoods revealed in Al Gore's movie, including the falsification of the topography itself, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that a court of law has found Al Gore's movie to contain false premises and scientific exaggerations is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the primary proponent of the GW hysteria is an abuser of the very utilities he tells all of us to curtail is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the primary proponent of GW hysteria has started businesses to make vast sums of money from his hysterical premises is not worthy of debate?

Yeah, I guess the debate truly is over until the ice age hits. Then I wonder if Al Gore and the rest of the GW hysteria crowd will take credit for that.
 
Sorry Jimbo

Rumor Debunked: No Flip-Flop on Global Warming
By Andrea Thompson, Senior Writer

posted: 18 July 2008 01:59 pm ET
Buzz up! del.icio.us
Digg It!
Newsvine
reddit18 Comments | 4 Recommend

Claims are floating around the blogosphere that the American Physical Society, the leading professional organization for physicists, has reversed its position on global warming.

But on its Web site, the APS has reaffirmed that it supports the consensus view that human-caused greenhouse gas emissions are warming the planet.

Part of the statement the society adopted on Nov. 18, 2007, states: "Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate."

Stories of the supposed policy reversal began popping up after an article by Christopher Monckton, a politician and a former policy advisor in Margaret Thatcher's administration, submitted an article in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society. The article claimed that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had overestimated the Earth's climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide (or how much the global average temperature will change given a certain amount of carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere).

In the article, Monckton, the 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, also claims that changes in solar activity are behind the warming trend of the past few decades, an idea that has been refuted by several climate scientists.

A note in red lettering above the article states that it has not been peer-reviewed and that "its conclusions are in disagreement with the overwhelming opinion of the world scientific community. The Council of the American Physical Society disagrees with this article's conclusions."

On their homepage, the APS has now placed a statement that reaffirms its 2007 position statement on global warming, which also states, "The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring." It adds that mitigation efforts must be taken immediately.
Click to expand...

http://www.livescience.com/environment/080718-aps-gw.html
 
jimpeel said:
So the recent discovery of volcanic activity under the Arctic ice sheet is not worthy of debate?

The recent posting of over 31,000 scientists, who deny that man is the cause of GW, is not worthy of debate?

The recent study of the ocean currents which move warm water to the Arctic, and thus affect the ice sheet, is not worthy of debate?

The delay in the onset of Solar Cycle 24, and the near absence of sunspots for the past decade, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that temperatures have been flat for the past decade, with no warming whatsoever, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that global warming is occuring on extraterrestrial bodies, like Mars, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that water vapor is the most prevalent GW gas, and the fact that most GW models do not account for water vapor, is not worthy of debate?

The fact, even admitted by GW proponents, that only 5% of GW is attributed to man, and we cannot do anything about the other 95%, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there are no GW models whatsoever which take into account cloud cover, because it is impossible to predict, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that most weather stations are located in areas which have become "heat islands" is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there have been warmer periods in human history than what we are going through now is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there are now notable scientists who are predicting a near future cooling trend, and a possible mini ice age, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the GW proponents have feathered their nest with this information -- saying that there will be a cooling period for several years after which warming will continue -- is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the GW proponents decry the shrinking of the northern polar ice cap, while ignoring the current expansion of the southern ice cap, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that volcanoes, the sweat glands of the Earth, worldwide are erupting, thus shading and cooling the Earth, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the largest storehouse of CO2 is the ocean, and how to keep it there, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that there have been numerous falsehoods revealed in Al Gore's movie, including the falsification of the topography itself, is not worthy of debate?

The fact that a court of law has found Al Gore's movie to contain false premises and scientific exaggerations is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the primary proponent of the GW hysteria is an abuser of the very utilities he tells all of us to curtail is not worthy of debate?

The fact that the primary proponent of GW hysteria has started businesses to make vast sums of money from his hysterical premises is not worthy of debate?

Yeah, I guess the debate truly is over until the ice age hits. Then I wonder if Al Gore and the rest of the GW hysteria crowd will take credit for that.
Click to expand...

awesome! now if you had confined this to ONE POST instead of four hundred and eighty seven and counting....

hey now we know your opinion and the pile of assertions that supports it. checked that one off. no need to tell us again. roger 10-4.
 
2minkey said:
awesome! now if you had confined this to ONE POST instead of four hundred and eighty seven and counting....

hey now we know your opinion and the pile of assertions that supports it. checked that one off. no need to tell us again. roger 10-4.
Click to expand...

So then, the point of a news/politics forum is what again?
 
2minkey said:
awesome! now if you had confined this to ONE POST instead of four hundred and eighty seven and counting....

hey now we know your opinion and the pile of assertions that supports it. checked that one off. no need to tell us again. roger 10-4.
Click to expand...

The debate is over when someone concedes.

Do you concede the debate over AGW?
 
2minkey said:
awesome! now if you had confined this to ONE POST instead of four hundred and eighty seven and counting....

hey now we know your opinion and the pile of assertions that supports it. checked that one off. no need to tell us again. roger 10-4.
Click to expand...

So I may only post one post on the First Amendment right of free speech; one post on the Second Amendment right to arms; one post on the fourth amendment right against unlawful search and seizure; one post on the Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination; etc., etc., etc.?
 
As many times as our government (or whoever) is willing to try to get shit past us.
 
On the other side of the coin, S'n'P posted about the Civil War at every single opportunity... how is that different?
 
2minkey said:
yes i do. you're entirely correct. there is no need for further debate. okay, bye.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Now don't try to tell me that I cannot debate, nor invite for debate, any other person on this subject. Since you have conceded then you will, I presume, stay out of all further debates on this subject; unless you have something to add which has heretofore not been known or you wish to take my side.
 
Inkara1 said:
On the other side of the coin, S'n'P posted about the Civil War at every single opportunity... how is that different?
Click to expand...

that got old, too.

however, in contrast to this thread and many, many like it, his posts were very entertaining. that goes a long way.
 
jimpeel said:
Thank you. Now don't try to tell me that I cannot debate, nor invite for debate, any other person on this subject. Since you have conceded then you will, I presume, stay out of all further debates on this subject; unless you have something to add which has heretofore not been known or you wish to take my side.
Click to expand...

my concession on this particular issue is in no way a generalized endorsement of your ability to debate or to form coherent, logical arguments, and was purely functional in nature.
 
The word is getting out there

More and more people are realizing that, contrary to the propaganda, the debate is far from over.

http://www.politickernj.com/bguhl/2...stifies-repealing-global-warming-response-act

DOHERTY: NEW SCIENTIFIC DATA JUSTIFIES REPEALING GLOBAL WARMING RESPONSE ACT
By bguhl - August 14, 2008 - 1:48pm
Release Date: Aug 14 2008
DOHERTY: NEW SCIENTIFIC DATA JUSTIFIES REPEALING GLOBAL WARMING RESPONSE ACT

URGES STATE TO HOLD OFF ON DAMAGING NEW REGULATIONS AS CLIMATE CHANGE THEORIES CLASH

Responding to various new scientific reports questioning the concept of global warming, Assemblyman Michael Doherty today called on Governor Corzine to hold off on proposing any new regulations associated with the state’s Global Warming Response Act and urged the Legislature to repeal that act when it returns to legislative business after Labor Day.

“There are many credible members of the scientific community who have questioned the theory of global warming, and now we have some scientists actually suggesting the earth’s temperatures may be entering a period of dramatic cooling,” said Doherty, R-Warren and Hunterdon. “With this growing level of scientific uncertainty, it makes no sense to enact a new set of economically damaging regulations prompted by the global warming hysteria of recent years.”

The Global Warming Response Act was signed last year by Corzine, which requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050. The law required the state Department of Environmental Protection to release a report detailing how the state would meet the goals, with recommendations now expected to be issued this fall.

According to recent news reports, a top observatory that has been measuring sun spot activity predicts that global temperatures will drop by two degrees over the next 20 years as solar activity slows and the planet drastically cools down. They suggest this could potentially herald the onset of a new ice age. Following the end of the sun’s most active period in over 11,000 years, the last 10 years have displayed a clear cooling trend as temperatures post-1998 leveled out and are now decreasing.

Earlier this year, John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel, stated that manmade global warming is “the greatest scam in history,” adding, “I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a scam.” Coleman said the theory of global warming is based on fraudulent science.

“New Jersey’s tax and regulatory climate is already chasing jobs from this state left and right and these new regulations will make matters worse,” Doherty said. “Rather than conforming our policies to questionable scientific theories, we should be looking at the concrete economic indicators that show our state’s economy is in trouble. And we should be taking steps to help people who are losing jobs and being forced out of their homes by this state’s anti-economic growth agenda – not making matters worse.”
Click to expand...
 
Assemblyman Michael Doherty

hmmm he sounds important. shouldn't he be more worried about things like getting the dog poop scraped off local sidewalks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top