Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Global cooling - the real danger

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 10:50 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Because you asked me to.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
thebaldfacts 



Joined: 02 Aug 2007


PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 11:08 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Tannin wrote:
thebaldfacts wrote:
Actually Tannin, the work referenced is from these:

Usoskin, I.G., Hulot, G., Gallet, Y., Roth, R., Licht, A., Joos, F., Kovaltsov, G.A., Thebault, E. and Khokhlov, A ............


^ What a laughably transparent attempt to mislead that was. Your unqualified anti-scientist mentioned an (apparently) genuine scientific paper from a largely unrelated field in his references and now you reckon on the strength of that his loopy, self-serving non-science propaganda screed must be legit? We weren't born yesterday, chum. Why not write Alice in Wonderland, What Happened Next and cite Einstein in a footnote? It would be just as believable, and probably more realistic.


Tannin,

Read the Australian article carefully and then read the other link posted. Your diatribe against Archibald is irrelevant. Yes You may disagree with Newman, but the scientific analysis from the atmospheric scientist gives no comfort for global warmists and indeed is critical of the IPCC.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thebaldfacts 



Joined: 02 Aug 2007


PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 11:11 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
thebaldfacts wrote:
Pies4shaw wrote:
thebaldfacts wrote:
Not surprisingly the Global warmists when their beliefs are challenged, resort to their normal abuse.

I suspect that the scientist who published in the journal are more qualified than you Tannin. Unfortunately it looks like you failed to get past the Australian article. Unless it is in Fairfax or the ABC then you resort to abuse.

Pies4shaw, I provided links to articles expressing a point of view. Not sure what you are looking for with a carefully constructed balanced argument.
It is a link to articles. Read them and make up your own mind.

Well, the outcome I was hoping for was that you'd stop posting links to absurdist right-wing rubbish. Its just a kind of trolling. If I wanted to read propaganda, I'd go the LNP website. Strangely, I've never had the urge.




Well Pies4shaw, in order not to offend your sensitivities maybe I should seek your approval before I post any links Very Happy

Then I thought there may actually be some people on VPT who actually are open minded enough to read differing points of view.

You're not offending my sensitivities, mate - it's just that you keep sending the drivelometer into the red.

It's not about being "open" - much of the tripe you link in your posts doesn't qualify as a "point of view" - it's just barracking.

Just so you're quite clear, it's the quality of the content I object to, not the underlying politics. It's the complete absence of room for rational, intelligent debate that makes me ill.


Know that you have finished your little rant, what part leaves no room for rational intelligent debate?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Tannin Capricorn

Can't remember


Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania

PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 11:27 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Get a clue, TBF:

1: No-one here can read the Australian article because it's behind a paywall and none of us are idiotic enough to give money to Murdoch.

2: Why would we want to read it anyway, given what we know about the author, who is completely unqualified and has a long track record of writing more-or-less the same incompetent, counter-factual, self-serving screed over and over?

3: I have not and did not mention Newman, though if you mean the Newman I think you mean (the senior Abbott advisor and recidivist climate denier who has been put in charge of destroying the renewable energy industry), he certainly deserves exposure as the tool he is. Nevertheless, I have not mentioned him even once, and once again you are wrong. Did you do that deliberately to smear? Or are you just having trouble getting your facts straight, as usual?

4: Stop pretending that there is an "atmospheric scientist" somewhere in this conversation. Your author, Anderson, is not a climate scientist and has no training or relevant qualifications. He is a fossil-fuel company director who used to work for mining companies as a geologist.

_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:08 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

"Unfortunately, it was beyond the scope of this paper to address the potential impact of solar activity on climate." QED.

Let's just be absolutely clear about this: none of Usokin et al made any claim to the effect of thebaldfacts' vapid thread title or supported any of the silly purported "points of view" he wants us to consider. Thus, everything that follows is just misconceived speculation based upon the absence of relevant data.

The problem with this sort of specious reasoning should be obvious, even to posters who are barely light-sensitive. I do not need positive proof that there are no fairies at the bottom of my garden to accept that it is reasonably unlikely that there are any. No, I can't entirely exclude the possibility - but that doesn't mean that I should therefore proceed on the basis that they must be real.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thebaldfacts 



Joined: 02 Aug 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:57 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
"Unfortunately, it was beyond the scope of this paper to address the potential impact of solar activity on climate." QED.

Let's just be absolutely clear about this: none of Usokin et al made any claim to the effect of thebaldfacts' vapid thread title or supported any of the silly purported "points of view" he wants us to consider. Thus, everything that follows is just misconceived speculation based upon the absence of relevant data.

The problem with this sort of specious reasoning should be obvious, even to posters who are barely light-sensitive. I do not need positive proof that there are no fairies at the bottom of my garden to accept that it is reasonably unlikely that there are any. No, I can't entirely exclude the possibility - but that doesn't mean that I should therefore proceed on the basis that they must be real.


The full quote is shown below. I agree with you that it is the complete absence of room for rational intelligent debate from the IPCC that should make you sick.

Unfortunately, it was beyond the scope of this paper to address the potential impact of solar activity on climate. Yet the reconstruction leaves a very big question unanswered -- What effect did the Grand maximum of solar activity that occurred between 1950 and 2009 have on Earth's climate? As a "unique" and "rare" event in terms of both magnitude and duration, one would think a lot more time and effort would be spent by the IPCC and others in answering that question. Instead, IPCC scientists have conducted relatively few studies of the Sun's influence on modern warming, assuming that the temperature influence of this rare and unique Grand maximum of solar activity, which has occurred only once in the past 3,000 years, is far inferior to the radiative power provided by the rising CO2 concentration of the Earth's atmosphere.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thebaldfacts 



Joined: 02 Aug 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:10 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

That is right Tannin. Everyone who does not believe what the global warmists do, is on the take or something more sinister.

The renewable energy industry is doing a good job destroying itself, it doesn't need help from anyone. Without the ridiculous subsidies provided to it, it would not get off the ground.

That is ok, you can take your cue from the Greens and their religious beliefs. As Bob Brown said, the Coal companies should pay for the drought because they caused it, except for when it flooded, then they caused that too. Guess they caused aids as well Very Happy
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:12 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Or, to put it my way: it remains entirely uncertain whether there are actually fairies at the bottom of the garden and, if so, how many.

You should give this up and try to find something you understand to post about.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 9:22 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

There was no need to quote any further from that drivel, by the way. Everything after the sentence I quoted is an irrelevant flight of fancy.

The sad thing is, I don't actually have a strong view about anything in this thread, except that I'm tired of your childish posting. I'm not a global warmist, you see - I do have one very strong prejudice, though: I'm fundamentally an "idiotist".
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Tannin Capricorn

Can't remember


Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania

PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 11:24 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

thebaldfacts wrote:
Everyone who does not believe what the global warmists do, is on the take or something more sinister.


1: It is not about "believing" or "disbelieving", it's about facts, and the facts are incontrovertible. "Believe" in any fairy tale you fancy but you can't change the facts. Oh, and a word of advice: if you want any normal person to take you seriously, keep those weirdo fairy-tale beliefs quiet, the stench of them will destroy your credibility in other areas.

2: Correct. The vast bulk of these climate denying screeds you and a handful of people like you quote endlessly do indeed come from the great denialist lie factories, places like the Heartland Institute, which takes money from the fossil fuel industry, tobacco companies, and weapon manufacturers in exchange for spreading lies and confusion any way it can. This is not my "belief" TBF, this is verifiable fact readily available on the public record. See for yourself with the summary links below.:

http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/15/leak-exposes-heartland-institute-climate

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/02/17/428111/exposed-the-19-public-corporations-funding-the-climate-denier-think-tank-heartland-institute/

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/Dealing-in-Doubt---the-Climate-Denial-Machine-vs-Climate-Science/Dealing-in-Doubt-Heartland-Institute-NIPCC-Climate-Change-Reconsidered-global-warming-denial/

_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
pietillidie 



Joined: 07 Jan 2005


PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:50 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^It just occurred to me how akin to gambling denialism is; the poor buggers just keep going back hoping their luck will turn.

This flip-a-coin psychiatry is probably initially based on the persistent yet evolutionarily dated heuristic which says that if I don't understand something, I've got half a chance of being right if I just pick a side.

And it's that hopelessly misguided belief in having half a chance of being right, of "winning" any time now as new information is published, that drives the irrational and destructive addiction.

Global warming denialism really is gamblingfrom the actuarial social bet right down to the behavioural psychiatry.

_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
watt price tully Scorpio



Joined: 15 May 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2014 7:00 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ It's merely TBF trying to deflect attention on just how incompetent & how corrupt the Liberals are as being shown either by ICAC or by their own statements. Climate change denialism is merely an exemplar of the moral corruption of what was once a half decent political party - now overtaken by the rabid religious right in bed with the lunatic fringe that is the IPA.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Sat Aug 16, 2014 2:08 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Going to be $$%^%%$ cold at the MCG
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Sat Aug 16, 2014 2:49 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

think positive wrote:
Going to be $$%^%%$ cold at the MCG


I'm not going. I'm over this season, this is the first saturday game since the hawthorn one and I just CBF going.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Sat Aug 16, 2014 2:51 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
think positive wrote:
Going to be $$%^%%$ cold at the MCG


I'm not going. I'm over this season, this is the first saturday game since the hawthorn one and I just CBF going.


Shocked

Piker!

_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group