• 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!

White House: Global Warming Out, 'Global Climate Disruption' In

Splooosh...another dropped deuce...quality stuff baby...

CONNECTED WITH...ASSOCIATED WITH. Where did I say he created the term? And do you REALLY want to sit there and pretend he isnt the greasy fat sex poodle poster child of the Global Warming movement?

laughing-2.gif
He isn't and if you were anywhere outside of America you would know it- because in case you have not realised it is a GLOBAL problem
 
Global warming implies that the world is getting warmer all over the world, not just a few places here and there. Hence the term global. Its not called "only in a few places it gets warmer". So yes it is kind of harder to argue that man made global warming is real if is snowing outside in September.

That is because climate denialist Americans think that local is the same thing as global and every time it snows they get confused
 
He isn't and if you were anywhere outside of America you would know it- because in case you have not realised it is a GLOBAL problem

Oh I KNOW...he isnt asked to to speak all around the globe. He doesnt go to conferences and Global Warming gatherings all around the globe. His farce of a movie isnt used around the globe. The Nobel group didnt recognize him as a world leader in the global warming cause.

Wow...man...put on a few hundred pounds, ditch the wife, squeeze a few massage therapsists asses and look how quick the left throws you under the bus. Al...ya fat greasy sex crazed poodle...we hardly knew ya...
 
That is because climate denialist Americans think that local is the same thing as global and every time it snows they get confused

Climate 'denialists'? The only constant EVER throughout history is and has been and likely always WILL be Climate Change. That the climate changes has never been in dispute. What is in dispute is the level of influence mankind has had on the climate. Now...maybe...juuuuuust maybe...if 'scientists' had stuck with honest research and not manufactured results there wouldnt be the basic mistrust of their results. If they hadnt fabricated or gamed computer models because the research wasnt showing what it was 'supposed' to show...if they hadnt been found placing temerature sensing equipment over hotspots to manufacture temp increases, if they hadnt wildly overcalculated results and presented them in scam fashion...and of course...if this didnt come on the heals of the global cooling ohmygodwereallgonnadie 70's and 80's...well...for people that profess to value science and critical thought...there are an awful lot of AGW disciples that dont practice CT...
 
Oh I KNOW...he isnt asked to to speak all around the globe. He doesnt go to conferences and Global Warming gatherings all around the globe. His farce of a movie isnt used around the globe. The Nobel group didnt recognize him as a world leader in the global warming cause.

Wow...man...put on a few hundred pounds, ditch the wife, squeeze a few massage therapsists asses and look how quick the left throws you under the bus. Al...ya fat greasy sex crazed poodle...we hardly knew ya...

Anyone notice how guys like this are mostly incapable of discussing anything other than Gore? The obsession is a little creepy.
 
That is because climate denialist Americans think that local is the same thing as global and every time it snows they get confused

Climate denialist? Since when did I ever claim that climate change is not real? I have never claimed climate change did not exist and I am pretty most other people who do not believe in the man made global warming fairy tale religion did not ever claim climate change was not real.
 
Last edited:
Oh lets see...I discussed the obvious altering of data...the intentional positioning of temperature sensing equipment in hotspots to alter data (with pictures), and several dozen others...not to mention the few thousand post threads that have gone on about AGWin the year and a half or so since Ive been here...but funny...asswagons tend to only pick on certain parts of arguments. I wonder why guys like that do that...

Oh wait...I know why...because they (he) are (is) a ...

loser.gif
 
Last edited:
Anyone notice how guys like this are mostly incapable of discussing anything other than Gore? The obsession is a little creepy.

I tell you what sploosh...why dont you start YET ANOTHER of the Deuce Knows Everything about Global Warming threads where you post your biased research...and see how much more mileage you can get out of it. Come to think of it...Gore shouldnt be the face of the Global Warming crowd...it should be YOU...because YOU...an online blogger vommiting up your biased research...know EVERYTHING and have all the answers and can simply with a dismissive wave ignore the opposing positions, for no other reason other than it simply doesnt match YOUR opinion on GW. Because they are SO effective...and the debate is SO intelligent in those threads. Its inspirational.
 
So, how do I get in this club where I can just stand up and say "THE OTHER SIDE IS BIASED" without providing any evidence of my claim, and declare myself the victor?

Seriously. One of you go start your own thread where you show evidence of falsified data and bias. I'd like to see it.
 
So, how do I get in this club where I can just stand up and say "THE OTHER SIDE IS BIASED" without providing any evidence of my claim, and declare myself the victor?

Seriously. One of you go start your own thread where you show evidence of falsified data and bias. I'd like to see it.

Honest to God Deuce...would it matter? You are a true believer. After 12-14 years or so of the panicked OHMYGODWALLSOFWATERWEREALLGONNADIE!!! bull****, is there ANYTHING really all that different? Nah. You, in your infitine blog of knowledge discount researchers own lies and the gaming statistics and manipulation of data because gosh darn it...its just not showing what we think it should show. Oh...but 'peers' (conmen mutually invested in trying to gain more research dollars) say...oh no...THATS not what it means. We have photographic evidence of temperature sensing equipment INTENTIONALLY placed over hot spots like black tops...next to AC units, etc and SHOCKINGLY...guess what!!! It PROOVES its getting hotter!!! But nah...that doesnt matter. THOUSANDS of researchers, meteorologists, scientists, and a collection of others (very similar in makeup in fact to the AGW set) state that there is NO evidence that MAN or industry has caused climate change and that climate change has always existed...but YOU jump in and parrot the true believers comments. Global cooling...WERE ALL GONNA DIE!!! no...wait...Global warming...WERE ALL GONNA DIE!!!

Meanwhile I and several others have said a pretty consistent message...the global warming lies and flat out bull**** aside, we ALL can agree to work for clean air and water. We ALL can agree to work for more efficient energy sources. Global warming? sure...just like there has ALWAYS been. Climate change? You betcha...because...well...as history has PROVEN...thats what the climate does. Yep...even BEFORE man and the industrial age.

Someone mentioned here the other day that ANYONE that thinks they KNOW the truth on all of this is full of ****. And she was right. You parrot other peoples **** because you are a true believer. Start ANOTHER thread on it? Seriously?
 
Honest to God Deuce...would it matter? You are a true believer. After 12-14 years or so of the panicked OHMYGODWALLSOFWATERWEREALLGONNADIE!!! bull****, is there ANYTHING really all that different? Nah. You, in your infitine blog of knowledge discount researchers own lies and the gaming statistics and manipulation of data because gosh darn it...its just not showing what we think it should show. Oh...but 'peers' (conmen mutually invested in trying to gain more research dollars) say...oh no...THATS not what it means. We have photographic evidence of temperature sensing equipment INTENTIONALLY placed over hot spots like black tops...next to AC units, etc and SHOCKINGLY...guess what!!! It PROOVES its getting hotter!!! But nah...that doesnt matter. THOUSANDS of researchers, meteorologists, scientists, and a collection of others (very similar in makeup in fact to the AGW set) state that there is NO evidence that MAN or industry has caused climate change and that climate change has always existed...but YOU jump in and parrot the true believers comments. Global cooling...WERE ALL GONNA DIE!!! no...wait...Global warming...WERE ALL GONNA DIE!!!

Meanwhile I and several others have said a pretty consistent message...the global warming lies and flat out bull**** aside, we ALL can agree to work for clean air and water. We ALL can agree to work for more efficient energy sources. Global warming? sure...just like there has ALWAYS been. Climate change? You betcha...because...well...as history has PROVEN...thats what the climate does. Yep...even BEFORE man and the industrial age.

Someone mentioned here the other day that ANYONE that thinks they KNOW the truth on all of this is full of ****. And she was right. You parrot other peoples **** because you are a true believer. Start ANOTHER thread on it? Seriously?

Please show me where "wall of water" or "we're all gonna die" appear in a scientific paper.

Also, the temperature stations are just fine. Even when you use Watts' list of "good" or "best" placed stations, you get an identical result when you run the temperature data. That's not to mention the thousands of signs in nature itself that the earth is, in fact, getting warmer. Are the birds in on the scam, changing their migrating patterns to fool you?

You think you have all this proof because some blogger told you it's proof. So, step up. Show me the proof.

Oh, and you're aware that "global warming petition project" was a complete crock of ****, right? Actors, fictional characters, and football players were on the list originally.
 
Last edited:
So, how do I get in this club where I can just stand up and say "THE OTHER SIDE IS BIASED" without providing any evidence of my claim, and declare myself the victor?


You're already in it.

Let us know when you admit that global warming is the hoax it's been conclusively proven to be.
 
You're already in it.

Let us know when you admit that global warming is the hoax it's been conclusively proven to be.

Please educate me, oh great one. Show me this conclusive proof.
 
I'm stating we don't know. That there needs to be more studies, and to say either way is dishonest at this point.

So, YOU don't know.

But you're willing to risk the economy of the United States on the presumption that the people who always lie to you are suddenly telling you the truth on the matter of global warming...oops...climate change...oops....I mean global climate disruption.

Makes perfect sense.

Well, the rest of us are saying that since the AGW theory has been proven to be a hoax, since the globe has been undergoing cooling even as CO2 levels (CO2 is not a pollutant) are rising, and since even though the con men who gave AGW have tried to repackage their hoax in prettier wrappers, they're still demanding our life savings to support them.

The honest men aren't buying the hoax any more, and we have enough sense to say prove the lies before you have our money.
 
It looks like the religious nuts in the man made global warming fairy tale religion decided to invent a new term since "global cooling", "climate change" and "global warming" do not not scare the masses into believing.


FOXNews.com - White House: Global Warming Out, 'Global Climate Disruption' In

From the administration that brought you "man-caused disaster" and "overseas contingency operation," another terminology change is in the pipeline.

The White House wants the public to start using the term "global climate disruption" in place of "global warming" -- fearing the latter term oversimplifies the problem and makes it sound less dangerous than it really is.

White House science adviser John Holdren urged people to start using the phrase during a speech last week in Oslo, echoing a plea he made three years earlier. Holdren said global warming is a "dangerous misnomer" for a problem far more complicated than a rise in temperature.

The call comes as Congress prepares to adjourn for the season without completing work on a stalled climate bill. The term global warming has long been criticized as inaccurate, and the new push could be an attempt to re-shape climate messaging for next year's legislative session.

"They're trying to come up with more politically palatable ways to sell some of this stuff," said Republican pollster Adam Geller, noting that Democrats also rolled out a new logo and now refer to the Bush tax cuts as "middle-class tax cuts."

He said the climate change change-up likely derives from flagging public support for their bill to regulate emissions. He said the term "global warming" makes the cause easy to ridicule whenever there's a snowstorm.

"Every time we're digging our cars out -- what global warming?" he said. "(Global climate disruption is) more of a sort of generic blanket term, I guess, that can apply in all weather conditions."

It's unclear why Holdren prefers "global climate disruption" over "climate change," the most commonly used alternative to "global

warming."

I've got a new term for the Obama Administration's first and only term ( Common sense interrupted)

And when did Bush ever give tax cuts to the middle class? I though his tax cuts were only for the rich.

This reminds me, we have to watch out for some bill called the Dream Act. I think it is some kind of amnesty bill they are trying to trick us with.

I really wouldn't put it past Obama to hurry up and cram cap and tax and an amnesty bill through before the republicans take control.
Even the amnesty I think he's going to try to pass by side stepping congress some how. might try to do the same with cap and tax. Who knows.
 
I'm stating we don't know. That there needs to be more studies, and to say either way is dishonest at this point.
Fine. Study, but don't pass bills that will wreck our way of life and redistribute our money all over the globe in the mean time.
Besides, even if it is real, we are not going to change it by moving the pollution from one continent to another.
 
Please show me where "wall of water" or "we're all gonna die" appear in a scientific paper.

Also, the temperature stations are just fine. Even when you use Watts' list of "good" or "best" placed stations, you get an identical result when you run the temperature data. That's not to mention the thousands of signs in nature itself that the earth is, in fact, getting warmer. Are the birds in on the scam, changing their migrating patterns to fool you?

You think you have all this proof because some blogger told you it's proof. So, step up. Show me the proof.

Oh, and you're aware that "global warming petition project" was a complete crock of ****, right? Actors, fictional characters, and football players were on the list originally.

"You think you have all this proof because some blogger told you it's proof."

Irony much???

How many pictures of temp monitoring stations on black top and next to heat exchanges would work for you? I HAVE posted them on numerous ocasions...so tell me...what value would their be in posting them yet AGAIN??? Oh...they can be 'corrected for'...'calculated for'. You cant see that if you have to keep 'calculating for' to get the 'desired results' then maybe just maybe your research is flawed? Nah...you cant see that. Wont see that. Mus'nt see that.
 
And the believers point to lack of snow for skiing as proof. The whole thing is a scam for power and money.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone do that. I'm sure that people have used that as an example of how global climate changed has affected local climate but that's entirely different; in this case they would be interpolating this as a result of global climate change. People that I referred to in my previous link are taking the fact that it snows in one locality and extrapolating out to say that the world isn't warming. It's sort of as ridiculous as saying "because it's snowing here it must be cold everywhere" when that's obviously silly.

People who deny that global climate change exists, or that it's anthropogenic, do so because of the conclusions that it would lead to if it were true, not on the basis of the scientific research itself. In that sense, they have a confirmation bias towards an outcome that would lead to their political conclusions - in the case of denialists it's that climate change doesn't exist, or that it's not anthropogenic, which means that we can't/shouldn't do anything about it. To democrats/liberals it generally means the opposite and that government regulation is needed.

This is the problem with people politicizing scientific research.
 
Last edited:
"You think you have all this proof because some blogger told you it's proof."

Irony much???

How many pictures of temp monitoring stations on black top and next to heat exchanges would work for you? I HAVE posted them on numerous ocasions...so tell me...what value would their be in posting them yet AGAIN??? Oh...they can be 'corrected for'...'calculated for'. You cant see that if you have to keep 'calculating for' to get the 'desired results' then maybe just maybe your research is flawed? Nah...you cant see that. Wont see that. Mus'nt see that.

Anthony Watts headed up the whole checking temperature stations thing. His team labeled many of the stations "good" or "best." So someone thought, hey, maybe we should run the temperature calculations using only those stations!!

http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2/monthly/menne-etal2010.pdf

Virtually no difference in the temperature calculations. This is using the skeptics own ratings. Watts posted all those photos as an accusation of warming bias but didn't bother to check whether there was any actual impact of his allegations.
 
I'm kind of in the middle of this issue. While I don't think global warming is fact, I don't think people who are denying global warming are right either. I think we don't know.

You're right, other than melting icebergs (which really cannot be measured), there is really no other physical evidence, just scientific theories that can't be proven to the average person, only to other climatologists who belong to the exclusive club.

ricksfolly
 
I'm stating we don't know. That there needs to be more studies, and to say either way is dishonest at this point.

The only support for a global warming threat are climatologist's theories, not physical proof, that's more than enough reason to be skeptical. I doubt if more studies by the same scientists who came up with the theory in the first place can add more light.

ricksfolly
 
You're right, other than melting icebergs (which really cannot be measured), there is really no other physical evidence, just scientific theories that can't be proven to the average person, only to other climatologists who belong to the exclusive club.

ricksfolly

Do you think the general public had enough knowledge of the Manhattan Project to make a decision on whether or not building an atomic weapon was even possible? If we waited until the public had a research-level of knowledge on every scientific issue, we'd still be using horse-drawn carriages and fooling around with steam engines.

There's plenty of physical evidence, by the way.
 
Back
Top Bottom