Freeman Dyson: Climate Change Predictions Are Absurd

[watsup]

It's based on his quote right here:



So once again you try your idiotic gotcha tactic and it fails miserably for you. Care to dig that hole any deeper?

Has Dyson done any first-hand research into AGW? I haven’t.

 

[PoS]

lol wut? You're quoting watsup telling you that he is just as ignorant as Dyson when it comes to AGW.

Your first quote is a gotcha attempt and now youre doing a change the goalpost fallacy after youve been proven wrong. LOL

Let me re-quote you since you so obviously love making yourself look bad:

omfg, you actually typed that?

Your "argument" for why we should trust someone who says he is not an authority on AGW is.....accusing people of "thinking they are as smart as Freeman Dyson"





That's mind-****ingly stupid. Pure idiocy.

It's based on his quote right here:



So once again you try your idiotic gotcha tactic and it fails miserably for you. Care to dig that hole any deeper?

Please keep digging that hole!

 

[PoS]

Has Dyson done any first-hand research into AGW? I haven’t.

He's done plenty, look at the OP and his other youtube videos.

 

[watsup]

He's done plenty, look at the OP and his other youtube videos.

I have. Thy show that he has not done any first hand research. He admitted so in his interview. Why do you keep pushing a clearly false narrative?

 

[Mr Person]

If we ignore PoS's dishonest post-editing, lying, goalpost-shifting, and trolling, this was the exchange:

omfg, you actually typed that?
Your "argument" for why we should trust someone who says he is not an authority on AGW is.....accusing people of "thinking they are as smart as Freeman Dyson"

That's mind-****ingly stupid. Pure idiocy.

It's based on his quote right here:

Not according to his own words. I have done no actual first-hand research into AGW and neither has Dyson. That puts us on equal footing in the matter.

So once again you try your idiotic gotcha tactic and it fails miserably for you. Care to dig that hole any deeper?

lol wut? You're quoting watsup telling you that he is just as ignorant as Dyson when it comes to AGW.

Do you even understand how comprehensively you have just failed?

See if you can follow this:
- Dyson says he is not an authority on the technical details of AGW
- Your thread asks us to accept Dyson as an authority on AGW, and rely on it to reject what climate scientists are saying about AGW's effects.
- We asked you why we should listen to Dyson when Dyson says he doesn't know what he's talking about.
- Your response was to accuse us of thinking we are "smarter than Freeman Dyson".
- You are now justifying that moronic display by quoting watsup saying that he is also ignorant about the technical details of AGW.

You are genuinely trying to use watsup saying that he is as ignorant as Dyson on AGW as justification for accusing watsup and me of thinking we are smarter than Freeman Dyson!



Ye Gods!

__________
It's like he's trying to get his own thread shitcanned or something. I can see why he'd want to do that. Shame he can't be honest about his mistakes.

 

[PoS]

If we ignore PoS's dishonest post-editing, lying, goalpost-shifting, and trolling, this was the exchange:





lol wut? You're quoting watsup telling you that he is just as ignorant as Dyson when it comes to AGW.

Ive edited no posts, just snip your usual bullshit to save space so that people wont have to read your spam over and over again LOL.

You claim Dyson has no authority, then prove it. Show me a link from an expert who refutes what he says, you cant because you aint got any. Keep failing.

I have. Thy show that he has not done any first hand research. He admitted so in his interview. Why do you keep pushing a clearly false narrative?

Your own pal says youre ignorant. LMAO.

Dyson claims he may be wrong, but may doesnt mean he is wrong. You people have a very hard time understanding English, because he has stated his views, and neither of you has refuted it in any way, shape or form.

All you people have done is make yourselves look bad, so keep it up!

 

[Mr Person]

Cutting out the trolling:​

​

You claim Dyson has no authority, then prove it.

​

"Climate scientist James Hansen said that Dyson "doesn't know what he's talking about… If he's going to wander into something with major consequences for humanity and other life on the planet, then he should first do his homework – which he obviously has not done on global warming."[78] Dyson replied that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much . . . "​

Freeman Dyson - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Show me a link from an expert who refutes what he says

What is so hard to understand about this, PoS? If a person says they do not know much about how AGW technically works, then that person is not an authority on whether climate scientists have got the technical facts wrong.

​

​

Dyson replied that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much . . . "​

​

 

[Jredbaron96]

snip

snip​

​

Moderator's Warning:

This back and forth between you two ends now. Focus on the subject of this thread and leave the personal attacks out of this.

 

[PoS]

Cutting out the trolling:​

​

​

"Climate scientist James Hansen said that Dyson "doesn't know what he's talking about… If he's going to wander into something with major consequences for humanity and other life on the planet, then he should first do his homework – which he obviously has not done on global warming."[78] Dyson replied that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much . . . "​

Freeman Dyson - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What is so hard to understand about this, PoS? If a person says they do not know much about how AGW technically works, then that person is not an authority on whether climate scientists have got the technical facts wrong.

​

​

Dyson replied that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much . . . "​

​

Doesnt matter, he made his points clear that there is no evidence of a climate catastrophe. You still have to prove him wrong, and you have failed to do so, what is so hard to understand about that?

You have cited no facts, counterarguments, or links of any kind to refute him. Stick to the subject.

 

[Mr Person]

Dyson replied that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much . . . "

Game.
Set.
Match.
Season.
Entire history of game.