What is your view of global warming?
You guys just can’t get your facts straight. “On June 11, the McClatchy Washington bureau reported that China has entered into a deal with Cuba for potential onshore drilling west of Havana. McClatchy also reported that Florida Republican Sen. Mel Martinez said a deal between China and Cuba for offshore drilling is ‘akin to urban legend.’” -Emi Kolawole Read the rest here. http://www.factche ck.org/askfactchec k/are_the_chinese_ drilling_off_the_c oast.html (23 hrs ago | post #1558)
Scientific error versus scientific fraud
Oh that was what it was supposed to be… The link didn’t support your assertion. It was a nice link about solar ovens though…not a complete waste of time. (23 hrs ago | post #3396)
Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
Add "staying on topic" to things Doof doesn't understand. (Yesterday | post #825)
Scientific error versus scientific fraud
Another long copy-and-paste time-wasting post; I didn't ask for that...does prove my point though. (Friday | post #3387)
Causes of the Greenhouse Effect
Another nonsense post from JRS: What is the first paragraph saying? Is Bjorn Lomborg a “AGW believer”? He may not deny the physical fact of AGW but his focus on polar bears shows he does not understand the problem. The example itself is also irrelevant. There is no reason to think that the “best-studied polar bear population of 1000 bears, in the West Hudson Bay” is representative of the bears that will face the most problems. Why should we think so – because they are “the best studied”? By the way, Lomborg’s analogy with organic fruit and vegetables is beside the point too. First he says, “If you reduce your child's intake of fruits and vegetables by just 0.03 grams a day (that's the equivalent of half a grain of rice) when you opt for more expensive organic produce, the total risk of cancer goes up, not down.” Really, how much? And then, “Omit buying just one apple every 20 years because you have gone organic, and your child is worse off” – that’s one apple while your child grows up. Talk about “minuscule” impact… We know that organic foods often cost more than others, but ninety-nine percent of the people who have “organic” or “not-organic” as a choice don’t have to buy less fruit and vegetables if they “go organic”. If you want to save money on food, cut out the convenience and junk food and cut back on meat (it’s not the only way to get protein). There are people who can’t afford enough food and literally eat garbage, but this is a straw man argument as is his polar bear calculation. Shooting polar bears in an area where the population is not threatened has nothing to do with bears in remote areas who’s habitat is threatened. (Friday | post #1435)
Scientific error versus scientific fraud
You are right again, but as we have all noticed, Gord just talks in circles when faced with simple facts. He is just trying to see how long he can drag this tread out and waste our time. (Friday | post #3385)
Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
(I see I got some of the links wrong. So here it is with the links fixed.) But why don’t we stay on topic? http://www.topix.n et/news/global-war ming/2008/06/army- sun-not-man-is-cau sing-climate-chang e/p4#c68 Doof makes a weak attempt to answer/distract here: http://www.topix.n et/news/global-war ming/2008/06/army- sun-not-man-is-cau sing-climate-chang e/p5#c87 Which I answered here: http://www.topix.n et/news/global-war ming/2008/06/army- sun-not-man-is-cau sing-climate-chang e/p5#c93 At which point Doof started into a discussion of Carol Browne (#108). This tread should have ended there. The relevance to AGW is minimal and there isn’t much left to say about the “article”. Actually it was a blog post, but if anyone is interested, here is another blog post about the first blog post. I especially liked this comment: “It seems like what they are saying is ‘If you smooth the data and squint a lot (sic), you can assume that climate is somewhat coupled to solar behavior (sunspot cycles), because, well, it occilates (sic) in the past consistent with what we believe should be the case.” But don’t take my word for it; read the whole thing: http://bradstaggs. blogspot.com/2008/ 06/dr-bruce-west-t alks-about-global_ 06.html (Friday | post #822)
Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
Yes you could call that a “dodge” but there is no reason I should get into a discussion of my moral bearing. It’s irrelevant, what you or I say about our own morals or intelligence. I don’t expect people reading this to take my word for anything. I made the “moral bearing” comment off hand intending it as commentary on a lot of other posts going on about religion. Those posts were however on another thread. My mistake; it was intended as commentary not self-promotion, and I understand the confusion. What I write has to stand for itself. When I write, “Add “x” to the list of things Doof doesn’t understand”, I am specifically commenting on something Doof has written. I have no knowledge of Doof’s intelligence or morality other than from what he writes, and I don’t pretend to have such knowledge. But why don’t we stay on topic? http://www.topix.n et/news/global-war ming/2008/06/army- sun-not-man-is-cau sing-climate-chang e/p4#c68 Doof makes a weak attempt to answer/distract here: http://www.topix.n et/news/global-war ming/2008/06/army- sun-not-man-is-cau sing-climate-chang e/p6 #87 Which I answered here: http://www.topix.n et/news/global-war ming/2008/06/army- sun-not-man-is-cau sing-climate-chang e/p6 #93 At which point Doof started into a discussion of Carol Browne (#108). This tread should have ended there. The relevance to AGW is minimal and there isn’t much left to say about the “article”. Actually it was a blog post, but if anyone is interested, here is another blog post about the first blog post. I especially liked this comment: “It seems like what they are saying is ‘If you smooth the data and squint alot, you can assume that climate is somewhat coupled to solar behavior (sunspot cycles), because, well, it occilates in the past consistent with what we believe should be the case.” But don’t take my word for it; read the whole thing: http://bradstaggs. blogspot.com/2008/ 06/dr-bruce-west-t alks-about-global_ 06.html (Friday | post #821)
Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
Get Informed” says he does research. That’s funny; I got this same e-mail that’s been going around the Internet a while, but have enough sense to see it for the list of half-truths and outright lies that it is. So I checked it out. http://www.snopes. com/politics/taxes /sschanges.asp (Thursday | post #820)
What is your view of global warming?
Silly Tina, if U.S. companies can't drill of Florida, neither can anyone else. If Cuba lets China drill off thier coast and we buy it (that would be news to me) it is all the more reason that it's got to change. Right? (Thursday Jul 24 | post #1552)
Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
Add "moral bearing" to the list of things Doof doesn't understand. (Thursday Jul 24 | post #812)
Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
She didn't die Doof. Doof wrote, "Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch died fighting for an idea larger than themselves... " (Thursday Jul 24 | post #811)
Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change
For the money – what elseLeather shoes work better on pavement. Didn’t find numbers for the Netherlands but hear is info on Spain and some neighbors: http://en.wikipedi a.org/wiki/Wind_po wer_in_Spain http://en.wikipedi a.org/wiki/Wind_po wer_in_Denmark http://en.wikipedi a.org/wiki/Wind_po wer_in_Germany New York? The English stole New Amsterdam in the 1600’s. Is there a point you your questionThis is a “straw-man argument”. It will be worse if we do nothing. How about this? "We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that's got to changeIf we listen to the majority of the Republicans (still) in Congress, this is exactly where we will end up. (Thursday Jul 24 | post #791)
Study blasts fears over global warming
Dragging this out again? Hasn’t it been pointed out enough times that there were no both for “AGW crisis peddlers” allowed either? (Thursday Jul 24 | post #316)
Study blasts fears over global warming
You are right; we should not take Republicans R Bogus’s attempts to speak for Jesus serious either. Funny though, you saying, “Very curious how the AGW crisis peddler ignore certain fellow crisis peddler comments and then focus on the skeptic and denier comments.” You of course would never ignore a fellow “skeptic” saying anything dumb, would you? (Thursday Jul 24 | post #315)
Like what you see?
Create your own Topix Profile
