• 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!

Climate scientists - there are plenty of them out there being ignored or disregarded by mainstream media

watsup said:
U


You keep making the claim of “much more money” for mainstream scientists, but when asked to prove it, you claim “already have”. Either show your work NOW or shut up about it. Besides that, grant money for independent research is quite different from the “conclusion first” methodology of the denier propaganda organizations.
Click to expand...
Where isn't the point I was making anyway. It's how much they are getting for total research money. It is so much greater that the small amounts you worry about.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Where isn't the point I was making anyway. It's how much they are getting for total research money. It is so much greater that the small amounts you worry about.
Click to expand...
You still dont understand that research grants pay for the research. Heartland grants basically are money that goes directly into the guys pocket.

But that requires an understanding of how science granting works, and you have none.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Where isn't the point I was making anyway. It's how much they are getting for total research money. It is so much greater that the small amounts you worry about.
Click to expand...

Thank you for being afraid to address the important points that I was making in post #2500. Looks like you were blowing smoke again, and you really DON’T have the figures to prove your “point”. I find it absolutely amazing that you remain in support of a far right propaganda organization that develops the CONCLUSION first and then basically DEMANDS the “research” to back it up.
 
watsup said:
Thank you for being afraid to address the important points that I was making in post #2500. Looks like you were blowing smoke again, and you really DON’T have the figures to prove your “point”. I find it absolutely amazing that you remain in support of a far right propaganda organization that develops the CONCLUSION first and then basically DEMANDS the “research” to back it up.
Click to expand...
Maybe your bullshit just isn't important. You deny the billions spent on the agenda, and complain about thousands doing studies that may undercut the agenda, saying itys because of money. Don't you see the magnitude or your hypocrisy?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Maybe your bullshit just isn't important. You deny the billions spent on the agenda, and complain about thousands doing studies that may undercut the agenda, saying itys because of money. Don't you see the magnitude or your hypocrisy?
Click to expand...

You’re adding nothing new. You’re just repeating your talking points. Let me know when you actually are ready to show the figures that you are claiming. Until then, just go on with your repetitive ranting.
 
watsup said:
You’re adding nothing new. You’re just repeating your talking points. Let me know when you actually are ready to show the figures that you are claiming. Until then, just go on with your repetitive ranting.
Click to expand...
You are the one using talking points and logical fallacies by claiming anything from institutes the left don't approve of are invalid.

You do so with no counterpoints.

Only talking points and lies. You should really consider the aspects of your character you continually project on others, and even funnier yet, you don't see the stupidity of claiming "projection" against others, when you do it all the time.

You never offer anything of value in these debates. If you wish to discredit the heritage foundation, or others, do so with facts. Not talking points. Otherwise, you are just showing hatred, ignorance, agenda, etc.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You are the one using talking points and logical fallacies by claiming anything from institutes the left don't approve of are invalid.

You do so with no counterpoints.

Only talking points and lies. You should really consider the aspects of your character you continually project on others, and even funnier yet, you don't see the stupidity of claiming "projection" against others, when you do it all the time.

You never offer anything of value in these debates. If you wish to discredit the heritage foundation, or others, do so with facts. Not talking points. Otherwise, you are just showing hatred, ignorance, agenda, etc.
Click to expand...

Ad hom rant. Thanks for proving my post #2505.
 
Lord of Planar said:
If you wish to discredit the heritage foundation, or others, do so with facts.
Click to expand...
As I have. They really need to be more careful with whom they allow to speak at the ICCC. Some of the papers being presented are really out in left-field, like using 500 year-old proxy data from the 1890s. While proxy data is a useful means for getting ballpark figures, they are by no means empirical evidence. Proxy data, for example, tells us that temperatures dropped significantly between 1250 and 1850, but they do not tell us the cause. Therefore, it would be a wild-ass assumption, and not science, to place the blame for these cold temperatures on an alleged lack of sunspot activity (i.e., Maunder Minimum) without actual observations. We had an actual observed minimum from the 1790s until the 1830s called the Dalton Minimum and surface temperatures did not plummet like it did during this aleged Maunder Minimum.

If the speakers at the ICCC are to be taken seriously they need to stick with empirical evidence and only use proxy data as an indicator, not the answer.
 
flogger said:
Thats what the ignore button is for and it works just fine for me ;)
Click to expand...
My problem is, a paricular individual has started threads I like to participate in. When I put him on IGNORE, I no longer see the thread either. I did that, contacted admin, and they said that's just how it is. You ignore someone and you also ignore any thread they start.
 
watsup said:
Follow-up ad hom. Point proven.
Click to expand...
Hey. You are correct in that I often make fun of people with less that a 120 IQ. The lower their IQ is, and the more they think they know more than me, the more I make fun of them.

Guess what. That puts you at the top of my list!

If you could just be a little more intelligent about your posts, maybe we could get along better. But as long as y that have no sense of reality... You make yourself a target.

It also doesn't help that you constantly talk to others whining over and over and over about me.

You must be the biggest whiner here!
 
Lord of Planar said:
Hey. You are correct in that I often make fun of people with less that a 120 IQ. The lower their IQ is, and the more they think they know more than me, the more I make fun of them.

Guess what. That puts you at the top of my list!

If you could just be a little more intelligent about your posts, maybe we could get along better. But as long as y that have no sense of reality... You make yourself a target.

It also doesn't help that you constantly talk to others whining over and over and over about me.

You must be the biggest whiner here!
Click to expand...

Triple-down on ad hom.
 
watsup said:
Triple-down on ad hom.
Click to expand...
That's all you deserve with your posts. Maybe if you post something that actually adds to a thread, you would get more respectful replies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom