And this is really beyond retarded, anyone with an IQ higher than room temperature would had accepted that I clarified later that I was humoring TOWP, in other words, that was just really an educated guess.
But this demonstrates why dealing with what the scientists actually say is anathema for guys like TOWP, it is easier to claim that the say so’s of the past from a poster contradict what they said today (actually, not much), it is easier to mislead others this way.
But it makes it easy to identify the stupid on people like TOWP, so you have my thanks for that.
Well, (a) can you post a cite to that effect? I’m not much on proving negatives. And (b) that quote wasn’t a reply to me; it was a reply to someone else entirely.
It doesn’t contradict at all what you’d said today. You’ve spent this thread refusing to answer my requests for clarification: I repeatedly asked whether that remains your prediction, and you repeatedly said nothing either way about whether you’re now predicting anything different.
Buy you’ve already said you don’t quibble with the scientists on this matter, and that you have predictions from other sources.
So why are you hounding GIGObuster on this topic? What difference will it make if, again, you already have these things from elsewhere?
More importantly, why should I have to sit through all of the repetitive, nonsensical, tedious, bolded AND italicized junk that you spew in your efforts to get redundant information from someone on the internet?
Take a look at his latest post: he’s now hinting that he “was humoring TOWP, in other words, that was just really an educated guess.” I merely wanted to know whether that remains his position; he could’ve fired off a brisk “yes” or “no, it’s now XYZ” pages ago, but for some reason didn’t.
The efforts are repetitive because the information (a) isn’t forthcoming, and (b) might not be redundant; GIGO has moved goalposts before, and may wish to do so now, and is free to reply with a quick “no, it’s still my position”; had he done so, you would’ve been spared my repetitive efforts.
Simple, it is a very trolling tactic, get someone that is not an expert on a subject to make an educated guess, chances are that something in the guess will not be accurate, pounce the hell out of it till kingdom come.. even if TOWP already acknowledged (all right he cried “faul!” like a ref bitten by a banshee) that I was indeed humoring him in later threads.
What this demonstrates is even yet another layer of stupid: that he thinks this will not be noticed or that one will not play his game again on later threads. Hence the cowardice on dealing with the science cites, he is impotent at explaining even the basics on why the scientists should be wrong. Or why the independent statisticians are wrong by reporting that it is dishonest to claim that the earth is not warming.
That makes no sense; I’ve said that I expect your guess to be accurate.
This is the first I’m hearing of it. You’d previously played the I-was-just-humoring-him card when explaining why you wanted to move the goalposts away from your original prediction, but until today I wasn’t aware that you wanted to play the I-was-just-humoring-him card about the “70’s levels” prediction. (Which, again, was your reply to a different poster altogether, rather than one made to me.)
Again, I’ve made clear – right here in this very thread, even – that I don’t dispute that the earth has warmed; I’m therefore mystified as to why you think I should explain why the scientists or the statisticians are wrong.
This is just Standard Operating Procedure now. Taking out of context has been taken to new heights by presidential contenders now. I would not put it past deniers to simply cut and paste individual words to put together a sentence that looks inflammatory.
Please do one of the following:
-Get your own fucking thread
-Do your own fucking research
Thanks.
Poe’s law dictates that I have no idea whether your post is stupidity or parody.
My contention is as follows:
No critical/important information was covered up. This has been, as said, backed up several times.
The threats of “covering up information” are not to corrupt the scientific method or cherry pick, but rather for the purpose of actually being able to do their job.
And then fill out the paperwork! And while we’re at it, let’s have their mail records, childhood photos, Social Security numbers, and ATM PINs, shall we? :rolleyes:
Again, the problem is that this shit takes time. I liken it to the HIV debate: every hour spent needing to rebuke a fanatically retarded HIV denialists is an hour not spent solving the AIDS problem.
That’s all well and good, but here’s what you’re forgetting:
I predict that nobody will discuss the topic in this topic. Of course if anybody actually starts talking about the recent release of emails, that will make my prediction wrong.
In case that’s too confusing, I predict the actual content of the emails (which is in some way connected to Climategate 2.0) will not be explored, discussed or argued. Instead the entire climate clusterfuck will be once again fought over.
From the Wikipedia link: " However, the reports criticised climate scientists for their disorganised methods, bunker mentality and lack of transparency. Climate scientists and organisations pledged to restore public confidence in the research process by improving data management and opening up access to data"
And that was before this recent release of even more damaging emails. Some of this new shit is seriously fucked up. Especially in context.
First of all, from what I’ve gathered, the release was of the same emails. Secondly, all I’ve heard were trash mags like the Mail or Fox News jumping on this bandwagon of out-of-context quotes… Which quotes are damning in context? Please, feel free to show us.
It’s true that Waldo is a bit of a one-note charlie, but the fact is that it’s a very important note. The starting point of the discussion of a scientific hypothesis should be to pin down what exactly is being discussed.
I personally believe that mankind’s CO2 emissions are likely to cause an increase in global surface temperatures. And yet I’m often considered a “denier” in this debate.
Just like creationists come in many flavors deniers come also.
In this case the South American numbered one is the one that denies that models are useful or that there is no evidence for feedbacks. This is so then he can pretend to be scientific when reporting that we do not need to worry as the warming will be minimal.
Please show me the FOIL requests made by McIntyre which are analogous to asking for childhood photos, etc.
There’s no need to respond to McIntyre’s arguments. Just give him the records. It takes a few hours to copy everything and the copy program can be run overnight.
And if the information is not critical or important, that’s all the more reason to just turn it over.
I’ve often taken the position that mankind’s global pollution is having even more damaging effects than what is usually discussed, including changes in the thermodynamics of the ocean/atmosphere system, but when I question some of the wilder claims made by people who seem, “alarmists”, they start equating my questioning some outrageous claims, with a denial of evolution, the holocaust, and then for good measure they insist I must believe in a flat earth.
It’s insane. It’s seriously fucked up. This latest “climategate” nonsense seems to be an orchestrated attempt to influence global policy, with the unknown hacker(s) having an agenda, which seems to revolve around feeding starving people with the money, rather than lining politicians pockets with it.
That’s one of the more fascinating things that came out of the purloined letters. The effort to deceive, the petty (but understandable) desire to cause trouble for anyone who asks for data, and of course the huge mess that ended up being about the simple truth, that they couldn’t “turn over the records”, because they either lost them or never documented what they were doing, so it could be replicated.
No matter how loudly somebody tries to shout that the emails mean nothing, that little saga that was revealed is quite revealing. And the drama! Oh the behind the scenes drama. It’s high theater.
