You didn’t read post 510, did you?
Still no answer to a simple question.
Boy you are dense, my opinion is to defer to the best current science, so I replied by not reinventing the wheel in the following post, that is what I do think about the issue, and I would think anyone that does not defer to the experts is just willing to let ideology run over evidence.
My opinion now is that you are not willing to deal with the science and the evidence and continue to just assume that just because you did not get a different opinion from a bloke on the internet you should act like if then it is ok to continue to depend on anti-science sources that are yanking your chain.
I’m telling you, he ain’t gonna do it.
He’s never going to answer of course. Even the most strident alarmists will hedge their bets when it comes to the meat of the matter. Like the fucknuts at skepticalscience, who I will now lay into. (emphasis mine)
There you have it, in a slightly large nutshell. But wait, there is more.
(note figure two, which predicts “The key impacts associated with 2°C warming can be seen at the top of Figure 2”)
Both the alarmists language, as well as the certainty of the near catastrophic “impacts” of warming, none of seems scientific at all. There is none of the usual language used when describing speculative musings on “what might happen”.
This is the sort of thing a skeptic might object to, especially when it is clearly tied ti some sort of agenda, which has little to do with changing mankinds ways, and seems all about attacking one particular issue.
Fossil fuels.
Be that as it may be (I also want mankind to stop burning fossil fuels btw), just because I want to change the world, I am not going to sacrifice logic and reason in the process.
Nor will I read language like “we’re looking down the barrel” and consider that scientific. It’s not. It’s alarmists, it’s fanatical, and it’s an example of the bullshit that is so prevalent, those who drank the warm Kool Aid can’t see it.
So…it is still a no. No answer to a simple question
Were my first two questions also something to “defer to the best current science”?
Does it mean you have no personal opinion on the subject? If so, what is the point of somebody trying to debate with you rahter than simply reading through realclimate? That’s the whole point of a message board, interaction.
AGW links are found by the billion on the internet.
Your classic “you’re a denier who won’t accpet the science” is interesting, becuase you still refuse to answer the first, basic question of AGW, which is climate sensitivity. We’re not talking abour Oxygen-18 isotopes in andean ice-core or dendrochornology in the late middle-ages.
Oh, good point. I know just what you mean by that. Faced with a flood of nonsense, insults and sidetracks, it is frustrating when the discussion isn’t a discussion, but a fuck pile of idiots all trying to desperately score points with their fuck buddies.
All the while insisting they are the bastions of reason and science.
The answer was there already, you do nt like it as it is clear that you have no will whatsoever to check what the science is all about. **There is no better opinion than an informed one.
**
And clearly now you are resorting to willful dense ignorance to make your point. the latest evidence regarding the climate sensibility was already linked to, regardless that my opinion agrees with the scientists, the evidence says that you are just willing to dig deeper to show yourself as a dofus.
Fine with me. 
Those “fuck buddies” are real scientists (contributors to RealClimate), but it is ok that he is willfully unaware of how an idiot FX looks like.
GIGOBuster could probably be replaced by a simple computer program which parses posts for key words; does a search on Realclimate; and posts a few random excerpts from the search results along with a nasty accusation or two.
brazil here is not is not the first one to make that lousy point, last one was a “Magnetic sun created all features of the earth!” woo woo proponent, same reasoning and unless NASA, the UN, Skeptical Science, and others are the same, this is yet another idiocy from the B man and FX.
There is actually an app that does that. Offered by skepticalscience
Meanwhile, back in the real world… the fuckholes at warmer central still have their asshole guide to climate online
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/04/its-sun-stupid.php
I followed the link they use as “evidence” of how the sun hasn’t changed. Even the certainty shows a clear change in total energy per square meter. But the error range shows up to 5 watts per square meter difference.
Yet they boldly claim the sun has nothing to do with climate. Not a minor role. Nothing. That sort of idiocy can’t be on purpose. There is something else going on.
Ah yes, when all fails resort to the conspiracy card. I knew the deniers would.
Yes, you’ve got it… something is going on. Something… suspicious. Something Eerie. Just keep your tinfoil helmet on and everything will be OK.
Stupid is not the same as conspiracy. But you’re dumb so of course you can’t know that. Carry on.
Ok, it is a stupid conspiracy.