If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   Across the country, more than 7,700 daily temperature records were broken last month, but the jury is still out on this whole climate change thing   (npr.org) divider line 346
    More: Obvious, temperature records, tornado outbreaks, Piedmont Park, First Tuesday Book Club, climate change, empirical formulas, jury  
•       •       •

3646 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Apr 2012 at 6:37 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



346 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-09 10:26:50 AM

OnlyM3: How about facing the fact that the Antarctic Ice sheet is growing (multiple sources) Not shrinking as the global warming religion preaches.
Report: Antarctic Ice Growing, Not Shrinking
Antarctic ice is growing, not melting away


That's mainly because it's turning into winter down there. The ice grows in winter time and shrinks in summer time. Seasonal change you know, buck.

/derpity.
 
2012-04-09 10:30:43 AM

This text is now purple: bmwericus: More heat means more water in atmosphere, which means more energy. This means larger storms and greater annual climate variations.

Except humidity is a temperature fluctuation moderator. It has a larger thermal inertia than dry air.

March was not only hot, it was dry.


The atmosphere is not homogenous however, one has to look at entire globe.
 
2012-04-09 10:30:46 AM
Just saw a show about a past super greenhouse event. Man was not even around then.

How could that happen?
 
2012-04-09 10:34:01 AM

OnlyM3: Q&A: Professor Phil Jones
Q - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming
A -Yes,


He then flip flops a year later.
Last year, he told BBC News that post-1995 warming was not significant - a statement still seen on blogs critical of the idea of man-made climate change.

But another year of data has pushed the trend past the threshold usually used to assess whether trends are "real".
Pick a side fraud.


Bahahaha - learn basic statistics, dumbass.
 
2012-04-09 10:38:44 AM

chimp_ninja: OnlyM3: But you can fall back on your "glaciers are melting at a rate of 50bn tonnes of meltwater each year and not being replaced" *whargarble. Oh wait. That myth is dead too.

Someone should tell the glaciers that. From the GCRP:
"Glaciers have been retreating worldwide for at least the last century, and the rate of retreat has increased in the past decade. Only a few glaciers are actually advancing (in locations that were well below freezing, and where increased precipitation has outpaced melting). The total volume of glaciers on Earth is declining sharply. The progressive disappearance of glaciers has implications not only for the rise in global sea level, but also for water supplies in certain densely populated regions of Asia and South America."

Cumulative Decrease in Global Glacier Ice
[www.globalchange.gov image 290x290]

And from NOAA's Arctic monitoring:
[www.arctic.noaa.gov image 628x487]


Reid Bryson is Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography and of Environmental Studies. Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research, The Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies (Founding Director), the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Many climatologists regard him as the father of climatology. Professor Bryson calls manmade global warming absurd.
 
2012-04-09 10:39:32 AM

swaxhog: GAT_00: No temperature record had ever been shattered this bad. And these were cities with 100+ year record IIRC.

And yet 100+ years ago it was hot enough to have the record until now. What was the reason in 1910's?


Ummm...

They aren't saying these are 100 year old record highs...

They are saying the highs were set sometime in the in the past 100 years.

Meaning that if it was just a solar flare, which have been happening over the past 100 years it is much less likely to be the cause than the fact that we have raised our temperature 1.4 degrees in the past 50 or so.
 
2012-04-09 10:39:49 AM

Gunther: Pointing out that global warming is accepted science to someone who says that it's not being caused by humans is not equivalent to saying "global warming should never be questioned!", or whatever retarded shiat you misconstrued my post to say.


How dare you question my authoritah!
 
2012-04-09 10:40:01 AM

Tricky Chicken: You seem to rely entirely on the arguments of others.


Yes, I generally trust the opinion of scientific experts in a field of study when I'm researching that particular field. But then, I'm not a goddamned moron.

I can see why our views would differ on that.
 
2012-04-09 10:40:02 AM

Thunderpipes: Just saw a show about a past super greenhouse event. Man was not even around then.

How could that happen?


Explained in my previous link.
 
2012-04-09 10:44:56 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Thunderpipes: Just saw a show about a past super greenhouse event. Man was not even around then.

How could that happen?

Explained in my previous link.


Only man can change the climate, that's what I am told day after day. We recently had flooding here in Vermont from hurricane Irene. The local papers are blamed it on climate change. Every single day there is an article about how we are all going to die because we change the climate. Face it, man will destroy the Earth. We are way more terrible than natural cycles or asteroids or volcanoes or the changing axis or changing orbit or solar activity. Nope, we drive cars, we are evil. Liberals tell me that "extreme" climate change is responsible for everything, cold, hot, rain, snow, fat, thin, black, white, murder, everything is because we use oil.

Oh, the flooding was a repeat of 1927. Never mind.
 
2012-04-09 10:46:04 AM

Thunderpipes: Only man can change the climate, that's what I am told day after day. We recently had flooding here in Vermont from hurricane Irene. The local papers are blamed it on climate change. Every single day there is an article about how we are all going to die because we change the climate. Face it, man will destroy the Earth. We are way more terrible than natural cycles or asteroids or volcanoes or the changing axis or changing orbit or solar activity. Nope, we drive cars, we are evil. Liberals tell me that "extreme" climate change is responsible for everything, cold, hot, rain, snow, fat, thin, black, white, murder, everything is because we use oil.

Oh, the flooding was a repeat of 1927. Never mind.


OK. Good talk.
 
2012-04-09 10:49:00 AM
So I take it this "not weather"?

You know, because anytime somebody points out cold temps or massive snow storms, or anything like that... Which by the way, in 2000 we were told that snow would be a thing of the past by now... It's "just weather" and "weather is not the same as climate", a heat wave is of course "not weather" but "is really climate"
 
2012-04-09 10:50:25 AM

chimp_ninja: Um, ask yourself which party is against contraception, and in favor of abstinence-only sex education. American Conservatives and the worldwide religious right do plenty to encourage unchecked population growth.


True and untrue at the same time. While I certainly admit that Conservatives' single-mindedness on the contraception issue is archaic at best, sometimes it's the old "wisdoms" that are best. Consider- The AIDS epidemic didn't occur until after the "Sexual Revolution" of the 1960's. Is it possible that it wouldn't have occurred at all, had it happened earlier when more rigid sexual standards were in place and promiscuity was socially frowned upon. Or, it might still have occurred, but been mis-attributed, because more gays would have kept their orientation to their selves back then?

But, I digress. While the Conservatives are certainly to blame for their limited conception of contraception, their party doesn't actively base their policy on peoples' libidos, similar to their counterparts. Could you imagine the population explosion that would occur if they did?
 
2012-04-09 10:50:36 AM
I actually firgured this year would be colder do to the eskimofagiolibragiolle volcano that threw out cubic miles worth of dust and shut down transatlantic flights.
 
2012-04-09 10:51:25 AM

GAT_00: Honestly, the fact that a couple of cities broke April all time record highs in March scares me a lot more than the sheer volume. That honestly shouldn't be possible. Mid-month too, which says that not only was no previous year on this day this hot but it was also hotter than it's ever been for the entire recorded history on for the next 45 days. To the best of my knowledge and it appears anyone else's, this has never happened before in recorded history. No temperature record had ever been shattered this bad. And these were cities with 100+ year record IIRC.

It's disturbing. But hey, it used to be hot 20 million years ago, so clearly we can't be changing anything.


Mother-farking chaos theory, how does it work?

Seriously, study the Lorenz equations before spouting off about what 'anomalies' of weather are 'possible'. Weather is a chaotic system, and it is the nature of chaos that the system can never occupy the same state twice. So, every day in the history of the earth is technically an 'anomaly'. You can measure statistics about the spread of states, but statistics just tell you how probable something is, not what is 'possible'
 
2012-04-09 10:54:25 AM

Thunderpipes: Only man can change the climate, that's what I am told day after day


Nobody has ever said that to you. You're a liar and (going on past behavior) probably something of an idiot.

randomjsa: in 2000 we were told that snow would be a thing of the past by now


Nobody ever said that to you. You're a liar and (going on past behavior) definitely an idiot.
 
2012-04-09 10:56:00 AM

trotsky: Confabulat: The thing that is so just stupid about global warming deniers, is they just flat out DENY it.

They aren't wise. They don't think, well what if there's a 30% chance all the climatologists in the world are right and my Republican friends online are wrong, maybe I should take that possibility into consideration.

Nope. It's just LIBERAL CONSPIRACY THE CLIMATOLOGISTS ARE ALL IN IT TOGETHER TO GET RICH OMG AL GORE

I mean, you want to witness stupid, look no further than that kind of thinking.

No shiat, the Conservative "establishment" should be farking ashamed of themselves for the bullshiat they throw at this issue. Instead they have millions of gullible idiots buying it hook line and sinker.


Have no fear citizen...the democrats plan of higher taxes will solve it. Throwing money at a problem works for eveything else....

we used to throw virgins into volcanos....now we throw money into the volcano and call it science.
 
2012-04-09 10:56:12 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Thunderpipes: Only man can change the climate, that's what I am told day after day. We recently had flooding here in Vermont from hurricane Irene. The local papers are blamed it on climate change. Every single day there is an article about how we are all going to die because we change the climate. Face it, man will destroy the Earth. We are way more terrible than natural cycles or asteroids or volcanoes or the changing axis or changing orbit or solar activity. Nope, we drive cars, we are evil. Liberals tell me that "extreme" climate change is responsible for everything, cold, hot, rain, snow, fat, thin, black, white, murder, everything is because we use oil.

Oh, the flooding was a repeat of 1927. Never mind.

OK. Good talk.


Seriously, doesn't anyone else get tired of the same old crap day in and day out? We got our asses kicked last March with cold and snow, one of the biggest snowstorms ever. The reason? Vermonters are ultra-liberal, so you know what the cause was, "extreme" climate change. It was warm as piss this March. Reason? "extreme" climate change. Can't they just shut the fark up once in a while?

Does man have an effect on the climate? Sure we do. Is it anything the Earth can't cope with an adjust for? Nope. Are we the primary driving force in any change in climate? I don't believe it. Earth does crazy shiat all the time, and it always corrects the problem. One of the biggest things that bugs me is fear mongering people never even attempt to say what will happen as the Earth warms but the obvious. What feedback effects will take place? Do people really think the Earth will just catch on fire and life will end because of some CO2? Greenhouses have happened in the past, will happen again. People are too afraid of change. Sahara used to be lush, just several thousand years ago. I would be sitting at the bottom of 2 miles of ice just a few more thousand years beyond that. We need to get over ourselves. Mother Nature doesn't care about us, we are fleas on the ass of a dog.

Who cares.
 
2012-04-09 10:57:40 AM
In this thread: A couple of people who understand how chaotic systems work, and a whole bunch of reactionary chimps who don't get that increased/extreme highs and lows can balance out to overall increased temperature.

Also: Warmer atmosphere = more water vapor in the atmosphere = more snow. So yes, global WARMING means we get more snow. You farking morons.
 
2012-04-09 10:59:26 AM

Thunderpipes: We got our asses kicked last March with cold and snow, one of the biggest snowstorms ever. The reason? Vermonters are ultra-liberal, so you know what the cause was, "extreme" climate change. It was warm as piss this March. Reason? "extreme" climate change.


Experiencing more and more of both extremes is consistent with climate change. If you bothered to watch that link you could learn more about why that is.

Or you can just talk to yourself some more. Whatevs.
 
2012-04-09 11:00:20 AM

Thunderpipes: we are fleas on the ass of a dog.


You know why that's funny? Fleas caused the bubonic plague, which is estimated to have killed 75-200 million people.
 
2012-04-09 11:01:29 AM

cubic_spleen: Also: Warmer atmosphere = more water vapor in the atmosphere = more snow. So yes, global WARMING means we get more snow. You farking morons.


it was one of the mildest winters in memory here in the north east. We had one snow storm in October that took down all the trees. Even the media has been reporting about the surpus of heating oil companies have in storage due to the mild winter.
 
2012-04-09 11:01:34 AM

cubic_spleen: In this thread: A couple of people who understand how chaotic systems work, and a whole bunch of reactionary chimps who don't get that increased/extreme highs and lows can balance out to overall increased temperature.

Also: Warmer atmosphere = more water vapor in the atmosphere = more snow. So yes, global WARMING means we get more snow. You farking morons.


And yet we had almost no snow this year. Your argument, how does it work?

Oh, only when it supports your view is it valid....
 
2012-04-09 11:01:46 AM

DarwiOdrade: Thunderpipes: we are fleas on the ass of a dog.

You know why that's funny? Fleas caused spread the bubonic plague, which is estimated to have killed 75-200 million people.


FTFM
 
2012-04-09 11:02:12 AM

cubic_spleen: In this thread: A couple of people who understand how chaotic systems work, and a whole bunch of reactionary chimps who don't get that increased/extreme highs and lows can balance out to overall increased temperature.

Also: Warmer atmosphere = more water vapor in the atmosphere = more snow. So yes, global WARMING means we get more snow. You farking morons.


I'm happy to see that you understand the best way to convince people you're right is to mock them.

/The warmer crowd, so respectful, so polite.
 
2012-04-09 11:02:50 AM

DarwiOdrade: Thunderpipes: we are fleas on the ass of a dog.

You know why that's funny? Fleas caused the bubonic plague, which is estimated to have killed 75-200 million people.


So we should be in dread terror of fleas now?

Oh wait, humans adapt.... it's almost like we can deal with whatever comes our way.
 
2012-04-09 11:03:34 AM
Same shiat, different day. America's equivalent middle-school science education makes this debate meaningless amongst laypeople. The DERPers on the right are stuck with the same debunked talking points they had 15 years ago, or go off on some conspiracy theory about how George Soros used Obama's time machine to go back and hold a blowtorch to every thermometer on Earth. The more well-meaning laypeople on the left use any deviation from the climatological average as evidence of a multidecadal trend.
 
2012-04-09 11:04:02 AM

Giltric: we used to throw virgins into volcanos....now we throw money into the volcano and call it science.


Okay, I lol'ed.
 
2012-04-09 11:06:09 AM
news.bbcimg.co.uk
would you trust this man with your children?

seriously, they couldn`t find a better picture?
 
2012-04-09 11:06:40 AM

Thunderpipes: DarwiOdrade: Thunderpipes: we are fleas on the ass of a dog.

You know why that's funny? Fleas caused the bubonic plague, which is estimated to have killed 75-200 million people.

So we should be in dread terror of fleas now?

Oh wait, humans adapt.... it's almost like we can deal with whatever comes our way.


So "mankind has no appreciable effect on climate" becomes "humans adapt"? Goalpost movement detected.
 
2012-04-09 11:06:51 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: America's equivalent middle-school science education makes this debate meaningless amongst laypeople.


So let's leave it to the wealthy elites to decide what's best for us all. And yes, I include Algore, every member of congress, and the puppet president in the group called "elite."
Gotcha, sparky. You do that and let me know how it plays out.

/Sorry, no sale here.
 
2012-04-09 11:09:19 AM

Thunderpipes: Oh wait, humans adapt.... it's almost like we can deal with whatever comes our way.


It's almost as if humans (the smarter ones) know how to move when the waves lap at the doors of their houses. It's almost as if humans have figures out that eradicating fleas helps stop the plague. It's almost as if ... humans have adapted.
 
2012-04-09 11:10:58 AM

HAMMERTOE: True and untrue at the same time. While I certainly admit that Conservatives' single-mindedness on the contraception issue is archaic at best, sometimes it's the old "wisdoms" that are best. Consider- The AIDS epidemic didn't occur until after the "Sexual Revolution" of the 1960's. Is it possible that it wouldn't have occurred at all, had it happened earlier when more rigid sexual standards were in place and promiscuity was socially frowned upon. Or, it might still have occurred, but been mis-attributed, because more gays would have kept their orientation to their selves back then?


The only difference between then and now is that people admit to the sex they are having with less fear of becoming an outcast. People were knocking just as many boots in the 50s.
 
2012-04-09 11:11:04 AM

OnlyM3: Q&A: Professor Phil Jones
Q - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming
A -Yes,


Hey, why did you leave out the rest of his paragraph long answer?

From the same link: Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods.

Oh, it's because it completely undermines the point you were trying to make.
 
2012-04-09 11:12:29 AM

Giltric: cubic_spleen: Also: Warmer atmosphere = more water vapor in the atmosphere = more snow. So yes, global WARMING means we get more snow. You farking morons.

it was one of the mildest winters in memory here in the north east. We had one snow storm in October that took down all the trees. Even the media has been reporting about the surpus of heating oil companies have in storage due to the mild winter.


Indeed. Here in the midwest we had above-average precipitation which, had it been a little colder, would have come down as snow. I think I spent a total of fifteen minutes shoveling the sidewalk this winter.
 
2012-04-09 11:12:33 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: It's almost as if humans (the smarter ones) know how to move when the waves lap at the doors of their houses. It's almost as if humans have figures out that eradicating fleas helps stop the plague. It's almost as if ... humans have adapted.


Humans keep rebuilding in hurricane, tornado, landslide, flood, earthquake, and forest fire zones....sometimes after losing everything they own multiple times.....and sometimes they expect other people to pay for their mistakes.
 
2012-04-09 11:15:56 AM

DarwiOdrade: Thunderpipes: DarwiOdrade: Thunderpipes: we are fleas on the ass of a dog.

You know why that's funny? Fleas caused the bubonic plague, which is estimated to have killed 75-200 million people.

So we should be in dread terror of fleas now?

Oh wait, humans adapt.... it's almost like we can deal with whatever comes our way.

So "mankind has no appreciable effect on climate" becomes "humans adapt"? Goalpost movement detected.


Didn't move anything. Does anyone here not even try to think about the good things that would happen if the climate warmed a bunch (regardless of reason)? Large regions of the Earth becoming less hospitable means maybe some population decline, which would be good (Africa, who cares?). large areas of the Earth may become warm enough to support crops (Canada, Siberia, etc.). Plants general thrive with more CO2 do they not? Wars for resources are good to spur innovation and good for those with technology. Heating bills will be lower for many. Entire new industries will be created for hippie stuff. The strong will get stronger, the weak will die. This is good.

The only reason we are even here (Man) is because of a catastrophic mass extinction. To then sit here and say some warming will kill us all is pretty goddamn dumb. Even the worst case liberal scenario will cause little impact to those with means. Who cares. Move where the hot isn't.
 
2012-04-09 11:17:10 AM
Never mind that most of the rest of the planet has been colder than normal (new window)
 
2012-04-09 11:19:06 AM
The globalist billionaires are driving all the monetary ships from here on out, so it's humorous to think that what any person thinks or says will actually make any difference at all.

Keep organizing your extreme cage matches in the chain locker, serfs, and enjoy your occasional and limited time in the sun on the deck, then go back to your scrambling, indentured bond-servant lives. Oh, and keep buying crap. It keeps them firmly in charge.

/Until you're ready to trade your artificial security for freedom, nothing will change.
//Most of the Boomers will have to die before real change happens.
///Meanwhile, they are the ship's officers and petty officers, the rest of us are the cabin boys.
 
2012-04-09 11:19:27 AM

BigBooper: HotIgneous Intruder: You're not going to stop climate change, bro, no matter what you do.

Lets assume that human beings are 100% at fault for global climate change, and significant changes in our behavior could change or even re-mediate increased warming.

Does anyone really think that those changes will really happen? Remember, not only the first world nations, but developing nations have to make radical changes. While the basic concept of green policy may be popular, implementation is the opposite. And that's in the first world, developing nations are much more focused on economic growth and development. In their view, if developed nations put in policies that clearly retard growth, so much the better; they grow all the faster in response.

It's very simple, the climate is changing, and were going along for the ride. We adapt, or we die. The sooner we give up the idiotic idea that we can change human behavior on a global scale the better.


So you're saying that 3rd world nations that burn dirty diesel like its going out of style won't be buying hybrids?

Some one should talk to those selfish bastards!
 
2012-04-09 11:20:04 AM

Thunderpipes: Didn't move anything. Does anyone here not even try to think about the good things that would happen if the climate warmed a bunch (regardless of reason)? Large regions of the Earth becoming less hospitable means maybe some population decline, which would be good (Africa, who cares?). large areas of the Earth may become warm enough to support crops (Canada, Siberia, etc.). Plants general thrive with more CO2 do they not? Wars for resources are good to spur innovation and good for those with technology. Heating bills will be lower for many. Entire new industries will be created for hippie stuff. The strong will get stronger, the weak will die. This is good.

The only reason we are even here (Man) is because of a catastrophic mass extinction. To then sit here and say some warming will kill us all is pretty goddamn dumb. Even the worst case liberal scenario will cause little impact to those with means. Who cares. Move where the hot isn't.


Now you're just flailing, and trying yet again to move the goalposts.
1) Mankind has no appreciable effect on climate.
2) Humans adapt.
3) Warming might actually be good!

That has been debunked:Positive and negative effects of warming. (new window)
 
2012-04-09 11:20:17 AM

Gunther: Tricky Chicken: You seem to rely entirely on the arguments of others.

Yes, I generally trust the opinion of scientific experts in a field of study when I'm researching that particular field. But then, I'm not a goddamned moron.

I can see why our views would differ on that.


I guess your argument cheat sheet only includes strawman and skips ad hominem. Perhaps you should use this Wiki Page to help you call out fallacies. You may want to pay particular attention to the 'Appeal to Authority' fallacy you seem prone to rely on.
 
2012-04-09 11:21:19 AM

Giltric: and sometimes they expect other people to pay for their mistakes.


No. Let me fix that for you:
They ALWAYS expect others to pay for their mistakes.
If there's any possible way for a human to escape responsibility, it will find it.
 
2012-04-09 11:25:06 AM

Gunther: Tricky Chicken: You seem to rely entirely on the arguments of others.

Yes, I generally trust the opinion of scientific experts in a field of study when I'm researching that particular field. But then, I'm not a goddamned moron.

I can see why our views would differ on that.


You are correct though, our views do differ on whether you are a goddamned moron.

Sorry, couldn't resist a little ad hominem dig myself. But you did set it up irresistably.
 
2012-04-09 11:28:17 AM

DarwiOdrade: Now you're just flailing, and trying yet again to move the goalposts.
1) Mankind has no appreciable effect on climate.
2) Humans adapt.
3) Warming might actually be good!


It's the conservative "debate" style that is also popular in climate denialism's cousins: young earth creationism and intelligent design. Conservatives don't understand what facts are for; they are an alien concept. So instead, they develop an arsenal of feel-good talking points that aren't even close to being consistent with one another (consistency being another alien concept to a conservative). Their "debate" tactic is to just fire out these talking points one after the other, ignoring when they get swatted away with the tiniest effort. "Oh yeah? How about this? ... Ok, well, how about this? ... Yeah, well, how about this? ..." When they run out of ammo, they just start again at the top of the order. Hence why ID supporters still talk about the 2nd law of thermodynamics, not that they could tell you what it is to save their lives.
 
2012-04-09 11:30:38 AM
Across the country, more than 7,700 daily temperature records were broken last month, but the jury is still out on this whole climate change thing

The jury is not out, the evidence has conclusively shown it to be true. However, this stupid single day single country data set does not constitute any proof of global climate change whatsoever.

It's just as stupid as when you do it, subby.
 
2012-04-09 11:33:26 AM

cubic_spleen: Also: Warmer atmosphere = more water vapor in the atmosphere = more snow. So yes, global WARMING means we get more snow. You farking morons.


Naturally. The warmer it gets, the more snow cover we get, the more reflected radiation, the colder it gets.
 
2012-04-09 11:34:12 AM

pecosdave: Global warming may be a myth.

Climate change is not. Climate change has always happened - such as:

The Medieval Warm Period

Which preceded the Little ice Age

Of course there was also the prehistoric, though not pre-human Holocene Clamatic Optimum.

Anyone who denies climate change is barking nuts. Those who blame it on people may or may not have some points, right now the temperature increase on Earth has been seen on Mars, Titan, Io, and Venus, so I'm not blaming all of it on people, though we may have caused a little.


So a temperature increase in some other parts of the solar system means what exactly? If the solar system as a whole is not getting warmer that what exactly is the causation that you think is effecting Earth, Mars, Titan, Io, and Venus while leaving everything else alone?
 
2012-04-09 11:35:34 AM

Tricky Chicken: Appeal to Authority


Go and read the wiki page for that "fallacy" right now.

...OK, you've done that? Were you surprised to learn it's actually a valid inductive argument as long as the "authority" is an agreed-upon expert?

I hope so, because the alternative is you don't think climatologists can be considered experts in the field of climatology. Which would make you crazy, as well as (as we've previously established) a goddamned moron.
 
2012-04-09 11:44:47 AM

Thunderpipes: Just saw a show about a past super greenhouse event. Man was not even around then.

How could that happen?


Super volcano probably. I'm not sure if it fits into the 5,000 year history allowed by whatever cave paintings deniers use as history books.
 
Displayed 50 of 346 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report