• 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!

National Climatic Data Center: 2014 Was the Warmest Year on Record

Jack Hays said:
Your puny ad hominem cannot recover your lost point.
Click to expand...

Its not an ad hominem, you're not able to follow the conversation. Your inability to understand is the root source of the problem. Either that or you are dishonest and just wanted to post a red herring to distract from your losing position.
 
Verax said:
Its not an ad hominem, you're not able to follow the conversation. Your inability to understand is the root source of the problem. Either that or you are dishonest and just wanted to post a red herring to distract from your losing position.
Click to expand...

You said the tweet was not posted or explained. You were wrong.
 
Jack Hays said:
You said the tweet was not posted or explained. You were wrong.
Click to expand...

LoL, in context of those mangled "quotes".

See post #339.

Those interpretations came from the DailyMail and JoNova.

See post #342

LoL, this is what I mean about you not being able to follow the conversation.
 
Threegoofs said:
Says the severed mouth on the ground, still talking. #blackknightofpython
Click to expand...

Haha I saw that in the other thread, was hilarious. I didn't know the Black Knight was a thing, never watched that show. Now I see where it comes from. :lol:
 
Verax said:
LoL, in context of those mangled "quotes".

See post #339.

Those interpretations came from the DailyMail and JoNova.

See post #342

LoL, this is what I mean about you not being able to follow the conversation.
Click to expand...

You are only compounding your error.
 
Jack Hays said:
You are only compounding your error.
Click to expand...

Says the man with no arms or legs.

unger%204.jpg
 
Jack Hays said:
Sadly, this nonsense is the all-too-common response of those who would rather not discuss the science.
Click to expand...

I was discussing and you decided to just stop and start claiming victory instead, so this is what you get.
 
Verax said:
I was discussing and you decided to just stop and start claiming victory instead, so this is what you get.
Click to expand...

You made a claim that was refuted. There is no path forward for you until you acknowledge that error.
 
Jack Hays said:
You made a claim that was refuted. There is no path forward for you until you acknowledge that error.
Click to expand...

LoL, you're ridiculous man. I explained it all to you twice, you chose to ignore what I said. You're so stuck on trying to prove me wrong or correct me that you will not acknowledge the context of what I was saying. How petty and pathetic is it to do such a thing?
 
Verax said:
LoL, you're ridiculous man. I explained it all to you twice, you chose to ignore what I said. You're so stuck on trying to prove me wrong or correct me that you will not acknowledge the context of what I was saying. How petty and pathetic is it to do such a thing?
Click to expand...

There is no context that makes an error of fact not an error of fact.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no context that makes an error of fact not an error of fact.
Click to expand...

LoL, how's the low road down there treating you? You know it all too well.
 
Verax said:
LoL, you're ridiculous man. I explained it all to you twice, you chose to ignore what I said. You're so stuck on trying to prove me wrong or correct me that you will not acknowledge the context of what I was saying. How petty and pathetic is it to do such a thing?
Click to expand...

The matter is concluded. :peace
 
Verax said:
Well sure if you want to look at it that way you guys have a point with that, that it may not be the warmest year, that the probabilities tends to it not being the warmest year as compared to all other years combined. However what about the other points...

The data points to it being the warmest.

The probability of 2014 being the warmest is much greater than any other single year.

Why shouldn't 2014 be crowned the warmest year? There is no other year that would be better suited for the job, it has the data and a strong probability, damn near 50% by NOAA's estimation.
Click to expand...

Because consensus does not make scientific fact.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You mean like we do to you?
Click to expand...

Have you been following this thread?

Even you cant defend JH, who insists that an article he presented quoted someone and the evidence clearly shows there was no quote, but a completely twisted interpretation of an (unquoted) tweet.

And if even you cant do it, it must be really dishonest.
 
Threegoofs said:
Have you been following this thread?

Even you cant defend JH, who insists that an article he presented quoted someone and the evidence clearly shows there was no quote, but a completely twisted interpretation of an (unquoted) tweet.

And if even you cant do it, it must be really dishonest.
Click to expand...

Do you claim the tweet was inaccurately represented? I'm afraid only a mirror will show you who is being dishonest.
 
Jack Hays said:
Do you claim the tweet was inaccurately represented? I'm afraid only a mirror will show you who is being dishonest.
Click to expand...

First, let's establish the tweet wasn't even quoted in the story. Because it wasn't.

Then we can turn to the absurd characterization of Schmidt 'admitting' that 2014 wasn't the warmest year. 'Admitted'? He proactively explained the statistics! The rest of the inaccurate representation has been outlined in earlier posts, and I won't bother to argue with a disembodied head any more.
 
Jack Hays said:
I've already marked this in the "win" column and moved on. You should cut your losses.
Click to expand...

In your fantasy world, you are the most brilliant man on earth spreading your wisdom to the masses.

In reality, you copy and paste nonsense from conspiracy blogs.

Your efforts to resolve this cognitive dissonance are very amusing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom