• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

2015 Was Hottest Year in Recorded History, Scientists Say

Deuce said:
Oh look another unskeptic with no response.
Click to expand...

If you re-watch An inconvenient Truth today, most of the apocalyptic predictions have been proven wrong.

In science, a hypothesis is an idea or explanation that you then test through study and experimentation. Outside science, a theory or guess can also be called a hypothesis. A hypothesis is something more than a wild guess but less than a well-established theory.

The great thing about global warming alarmists is they believe in a hypothesis that cannot be proven wrong. They are very much like the 9/11 Truthers that believe 9/11 was a inside job.
 
Bucky said:
The great thing about global warming alarmists is they believe in a hypothesis that cannot be proven wrong. They are very much like the 9/11 Truthers that believe 9/11 was a inside job.
Click to expand...

You are wrong.

Unlike the 911 truthers, the alarmists can cause real economic damage to world economies.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You are wrong.

Unlike the 911 truthers, the alarmists can cause real economic damage to world economies.
Click to expand...

Lord, I believe we are on the same page. It is sad to see so many people support global warming alarmists based on fear mongering.
 
Bucky said:
Lord, I believe we are on the same page. It is sad to see so many people support global warming alarmists based on fear mongering.
Click to expand...

Yep.

I just couldn't help but to throw in that friendly jab.

The 911 truthers are funny.

The CO2 alarnists are scary, because they have political traction.

Both wrong, but one is dangerous. The other isn't.
 
Threegoofs said:
Only in bizarroland can the position held by most scientists and virtually all scientific organizations be compared to 911 truthers.
Click to expand...

Doesn't seem that bizarre to me, since you act like one of them.

You have no facts, never back up you claims. How many times have you been asked to link relevant material, and never produce?

My God.. the truthers do better than you do!
 
Since we have been in a warming period now for over 10,000 years it only makes sense that we will be setting records. :thinking

It is impossible for the planet to warm up for 10,000 years without having hotter years.:doh

Everything is just as should be until the warming period ends and the next cooling period starts. Then we will see record cold years.:thumbs:
 
Lord of Planar said:
Doesn't seem that bizarre to me, since you act like one of them.

You have no facts, never back up you claims. How many times have you been asked to link relevant material, and never produce?

My God.. the truthers do better than you do!
Click to expand...

Funny...you usually complain that I link TOO MUCH material, and that you need a 'relevant passage' pulled out of the IPCC report, paper, NASA website, etc!
 
Threegoofs said:
Funny...you usually complain that I link TOO MUCH material, and that you need a 'relevant passage' pulled out of the IPCC report, paper, NASA website, etc!
Click to expand...

You link the entire IPCC web site, bloggers, and spinmeisters. Never any solid facts.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You link the entire IPCC web site, bloggers, and spinmeisters. Never any solid facts.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that the IPCC is composed of facts- generally published, peer reviewed ones.

And the truthers also complain when government websites are pointed to, like NASA, NOAA, etc.

Face it man...you're a conspiracy theorist. Accept the truth.
 
Threegoofs said:
Only in bizarroland can the position held by most scientists and virtually all scientific organizations be compared to 911 truthers.
Click to expand...

Hysteria, arrogance, and fear are political tools used by your people.

Give it a rest.
 
Bucky said:
Hysteria, arrogance, and fear are political tools used by your people.

Give it a rest.
Click to expand...

Translation of arrogance in this case seems to be having experts tell you things you don't like and then insisting non-experts have a better handle on things.

Fear and hysteria are translated here as outlining the consequences of warming by 2100 in a realistic manner, and having you misinterpret it and assume that the predictions for 2100 will occur in 2017.
 
Threegoofs said:
Translation of arrogance in this case seems to be having experts tell you things you don't like and then insisting non-experts have a better handle on things.

Fear and hysteria are translated here as outlining the consequences of warming by 2100 in a realistic manner, and having you misinterpret it and assume that the predictions for 2100 will occur in 2017.
Click to expand...

As in consequences you mean end of civilization?
 
Threegoofs said:
So you don't even know what the consequences might be, but you know they are 'hysterical'?
Click to expand...

Just say the world is going to end. That is similar tactics some pastors use to convince people to follow Christ.
 
Bucky said:
Just say the world is going to end. That is similar tactics some pastors use to convince people to follow Christ.
Click to expand...

So you again demonstrate you don't really understand the consequences. But you 'know ' that whatever they are, it's not true.

I'd recommend reading the IPCC, specifically the section named WG2, and if you can grasp that, move to WG3.
 
Threegoofs said:
So you again demonstrate you don't really understand the consequences. But you 'know ' that whatever they are, it's not true.

I'd recommend reading the IPCC, specifically the section named WG2, and if you can grasp that, move to WG3.
Click to expand...




El Niño shortens the Pause by just one month

No global warming at all for 18 years 8 months By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley The Paris agreement is more dangerous than it appears. Though the secession clause that this column has argued for was inserted into the second draft and remained in the final text, the zombies who have replaced the diplomatic negotiators of…
 
Jack Hays said:



El Niño shortens the Pause by just one month

No global warming at all for 18 years 8 months By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley The Paris agreement is more dangerous than it appears. Though the secession clause that this column has argued for was inserted into the second draft and remained in the final text, the zombies who have replaced the diplomatic negotiators of…
Click to expand...

Oh, look. A blog post that addresses nothing in the quoted response.

Wonder how many threads this will get spammed on.
 
Threegoofs said:
Translation of arrogance in this case seems to be having experts tell you things you don't like and then insisting non-experts have a better handle on things.

Fear and hysteria are translated here as outlining the consequences of warming by 2100 in a realistic manner, and having you misinterpret it and assume that the predictions for 2100 will occur in 2017.
Click to expand...

You Democrats and left-wing nut bars can throw all the money to the scientific community and distort the facts..... we aint buying your ****.

Real non-partisan scientists have bravely come out and told the truth. Remember Gailileo was imprisoned and discredited for believing in Heliocentrism.
 
Bucky said:
You Democrats and left-wing nut bars can throw all the money to the scientific community and distort the facts..... we aint buying your ****.

Real non-partisan scientists have bravely come out and told the truth. Remember Gailileo was imprisoned and discredited for believing in Heliocentrism.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Looks like most of those 'real non-partisan scientists' are the ones who are shilling for Heartland who is primarily funded by fossil fuel companies.

And they just hope enough suckers buy their schtick, just like they did when the fought tobacco regulation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom