Do you have adblock enabled?
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  
•       •       •

3652 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 03:57:12 PM  

hershy799: Anyone who uses one day/week/month/year to (dis)prove global warming needs to be shot.

Give me at least 100 years of temperature AND CO2 data, then we'll talk.


Gee, we don't have 100 years of global temperature data to 1Km resolution so all the CO2 science has to be rejected!

/Even though the greenhouse effect is so basic that even Mythbusters have managed to duplicate it.
 
2012-04-09 04:16:51 PM  

squirrelflavoredyogurt: 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?


It's not like we have a thermometer on every planetary body. Think about it, some of these things are hard to keep tabs on. I vote for sending you out with a scooty-puff Jr. to put a thermometer and camera on each.
 
2012-04-09 04:20:20 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Tricky Chicken: DarwiOdrade:

Maybe if you read the link I posted instead of making stupid shiat up, you'd understand that warming would be a huge disaster in spite of the few meager benefits it might bring.

Why do I keep getting referred to skepticalscience.com? Has skepticalscience.com become the defacto repository of pro climate change arguments? It is like when christians keep referring back to the Bible. I know I'm comparing apples and elephants there. I just get curious when people keep running to the same source. That site is decent for support that the climate is changing, Then it gets all weak in the knees on the anthropomorphic angle.

It is like they are alts or something.

1) I wasn't responding to you, unless you are Thunderpipes' alt.
2) I was refuting his claim that warming would be beneficial, not making any statement about its causes.


Sorry, I was just noting that that seems the goto site for canned arguments. My observation about their anthropomorphic argument is not as robust as their argument for climate change was ancillary. I only mention the alt idea since you both use the same source. Thunderpipes is a little too right wing for my tastes.
 
2012-04-09 04:23:05 PM  
Pass carrying folks here in Colorado are hard pressed to find snow.
 
2012-04-09 04:42:34 PM  

pecosdave: It's not like we have a thermometer on every planetary body.


Other than Earth and Mars it's not like we have thermometers on any planetary body (Cassini is in orbit, not "on" Saturn. But it's actually in a better position to get global temperatures then a probe on the surface that only records local temperature).

So what's your point? Because we don't have thermometers on them, people can't point out that it's cooling on other planets and moons but you can claim that it's warming on others, even though those most of those also have no thermometers on them? Nothing has been out to Neptune since 1989, and nothing was out there before. So how can you claim it's warming on Neptune and Triton?

As has been pointed out, all these other warmings are known and have reasons other than "it's the sun". Since it's discovery, Neptune has only just now completed a single orbit of the sun. We've only had equipment to even begin to estimate the temperatures on Neptune and Triton for about 60 years (or any other planet/moon other than Earth for that matter).
 
2012-04-09 05:00:36 PM  

Tricky Chicken: My observation about their anthropomorphic argument is not as robust as their argument for climate change was ancillary.


If you're concerned about climate change that is shaped like people, no wonder you're confused. :)

Tricky Chicken: I know I'm comparing apples and elephants there. I just get curious when people keep running to the same source.


I haven't cited them in this thread, but since one purpose of the site is to compile common myths about science and debunk them, it's not that suspicious. If the topic was urban legends, you'd get sent to Snopes often. If the topic was baseball, you'd get sent to MLB.com or ESPN or Baseball Reference often. If the topic was movies, you'd get sent to IMDB often.

It's not nearly the only site referenced in the thread, either. Just from my own posts, I've sent people to a couple different parts of NOAA, NASA, a journal (Proc. Royal Soc. A), the GCRP, Wikipedia (for current events), and the BBC (since someone mentioned what Phil Jones was saying in the media, and I wanted actual quotes, not excerpts).

Skeptical Science is better than most sites at providing reputable, primary citations for their claims, also.
 
2012-04-09 05:08:55 PM  

snarfyboy: pecosdave: It's not like we have a thermometer on every planetary body.

Other than Earth and Mars it's not like we have thermometers on any planetary body (Cassini is in orbit, not "on" Saturn. But it's actually in a better position to get global temperatures then a probe on the surface that only records local temperature).

So what's your point? Because we don't have thermometers on them, people can't point out that it's cooling on other planets and moons but you can claim that it's warming on others, even though those most of those also have no thermometers on them? Nothing has been out to Neptune since 1989, and nothing was out there before. So how can you claim it's warming on Neptune and Triton?

As has been pointed out, all these other warmings are known and have reasons other than "it's the sun". Since it's discovery, Neptune has only just now completed a single orbit of the sun. We've only had equipment to even begin to estimate the temperatures on Neptune and Triton for about 60 years (or any other planet/moon other than Earth for that matter).


It's also a really bizarre way to measure solar inputs. He's arguing that because he thinks Neptune is warming, it means the Sun's irradiance has changed and therefore Sarah Palin is automatically President and Barack Obama has to sing "I've been Workin' on the Railroad" while driving a coal-powered train.

If that's your hypothesis, NASA has a small pile of satellites measuring the sun's output directly. We know it's slightly declined over the last several decades, and we know it to a ridiculous precision. Why extrapolate from a blurry, poorly-understood object that's 30 AU away?

science.nasa.gov
 
2012-04-09 05:15:10 PM  

Tricky Chicken: I assert that the impact man has on climate would have to be measured on a sliding scale. The effect could be anywhere from 'Some impact but so miniscule that it is negligible' to 'Such a major impact that it is the only significant force for climate change'.


How you looked at climate forcings as a simple metric for this? They're a translation of these different effects to their impact on the planetary energy budget in common units, usually W/m2.

www.esrl.noaa.gov

(Chart courtesy of NOAA, based on IPCC data.)
 
2012-04-09 05:50:36 PM  

Sugarloafer: Pass carrying folks here in Colorado are hard pressed to find snow.


You mean the douchebags who wear their ski resprt passes dangling from their coat zippers?

Sucks to be them.
 
2012-04-09 05:54:07 PM  

Sgygus: Dog Welder: Weather does not equal climate.

One of these summers we are going to get slapped so hard by the weather that we won't care if it was the weather or the climate that is withering our crops.


We had that about 70 years ago.
 
2012-04-09 06:41:05 PM  
Pffft.

Not us multi-syllabic mouth-breathers, yo.

Heh.

;)
 
2012-04-09 06:50:31 PM  
what, no pirate graph?
 
2012-04-09 07:10:58 PM  

Tricky Chicken: Sorry, I was just noting that that seems the goto site for canned arguments. My observation about their anthropomorphic argument is not as robust as their argument for climate change was ancillary. I only mention the alt idea since you both use the same source. Thunderpipes is a little too right wing for my tastes.


It is the goto site for canned arguments, especially against the more retarded, but oft-repeated BS.
 
2012-04-09 07:25:25 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Sugarloafer: Pass carrying folks here in Colorado are hard pressed to find snow.

You mean the douchebags who wear their ski resprt passes dangling from their coat zippers?

Sucks to be them.


Ah, was not THAT bad, but ended early. Heck, I did 30% more vertical this year than I did last year. And with two less days on the mountain. That's a million, three hundred thousand vertical this year.

Oh, well, next year, odds are 50-50 that snowfall will be above average.

Oh, and with RFID pass technology, pass stays safely tucked into a pocket all day long, nothing to flap around you know.
 
2012-04-09 07:25:51 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Tricky Chicken: Sorry, I was just noting that that seems the goto site for canned arguments. My observation about their anthropomorphic argument is not as robust as their argument for climate change was ancillary. I only mention the alt idea since you both use the same source. Thunderpipes is a little too right wing for my tastes.

It is the goto site for canned arguments, especially against the more retarded, but oft-repeated BS.


Wow,

apologies, but i read into that comment; may i explicate?

writer is proud to obfuscate with words, to sound smart (smrt) at all costs...

reminds me of today's will from the washington rag...

Smrt at all costs?

Whatever, man.

Yer obfuscation is unsuccessful, sir.

I understand and wield big words too.

And I am left wanting something from that.

Apologies; I speak sometimes unguided and always unpaid...

;)
 
2012-04-09 08:53:31 PM  

Tricky Chicken: I have given up on a rational discussion with that guy. I thought I had simplified my position sufficiently for him. Then he restates my position to something he can deal with (see Strawman fallacy), and then doesn't even defeat his own strawman.


Oh man, I come back from work to see you've gotten all cocky in my absence. So far, your "arguments" have consisted of demanding evidence then rejecting it out of hand as insufficient without refuting it, and accusing me of making a (perfectly valid) Appeal to Authority argument, which you amusingly thought was always a fallacy. Oh, and a series of increasingly childish "comebacks".

And now you're whining about mysterious strawmen arguments that you can't seem to point out. It's just kinda sad at this point.
 
2012-04-09 09:02:09 PM  

Somacandra: foo monkey: The same thing happened 55 million years ago

I don't think comparing high temperatures today to the time when the Earth was a smoldering ball of lava is terribly helpful.


Umm, no. (new window)
 
2012-04-09 09:34:39 PM  
I pulled the avg yearly temp data from NOAA for Austin TX. Austin is seeing a warming trend since the 1850's. I don't know about global warming, but Austin-warming is in the bag.

img256.imageshack.us

/go nothing
//bie eip!
 
2012-04-10 12:41:37 AM  
seven thousand seven hundred misread thermometers out of fifty thousand on one day is NOT a trend... its just farking morons.

Did you know that the "lowest temperature" daily readings depended on when the morons went out to shake the thermometer down?

Not shiatting you.

Two readings a day until the middle of the last decade when satellite uplinked equipment was installed so we could take minute by minute readings.
 
2012-04-10 01:36:30 AM  

Tricky Chicken: event-massive snowstorms

Global warming response-WEATHER DOES NOT EQUAL CLIMATE!

event-heat wave

Global warming response-OMG, SEE WE WERE RIGHT!! (now weather equals climate)


It's simple: Moderate increase in global temperatures = extreme weather. Higher highs, lower lows, more tornadoes and hurricanes.

This is what the models have predicted for decades. Scientists prefer to talk about "Climate Change" because even though a slightly warmer globe is the catalyst for a significantly changed climate, the words "Global Warming" bring the wrong preconceptions to the lay public.

event-massive snowstorms

Deniers: OMG IT'S COLD! THIS PROVES GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE!!!
Science: Well, no actually, I told you that climate change models predicted more severe winters as one of the expected...
Deniers: LULZ! YOU SAID WE'D ALL BE LIVING ON TATTOOINE BY NOW!!!
Science: That's not even... look... I said that raising the average temperature by 2 degrees would put a huge amount of energy into the system...
Deniers: IF ITS COLDER HOW CAN THE AVERAGE GO UP? IT CANT!!! YOU SUCH AT LIFE N))B!
Science: Wait, what? It has gone up. You realize I've actually been measuring this, right? An average is like the middle point. If the low point goes down some, but the high point goes up more, then the...

event-massive snowstorms

Deniers: HAH! NOW THAT ITS TO HOT YOU ARE CLAIMING YOU WERE RIGHT ALL ALONG!
Science: My models for the last decade or so have been pretty spot on.
Deniers: U SAID IT WOULD ONLY BE 2 DEGRESS HOTTER! THAT"S NOT ENOUF 2 BREAK RECORDS! U CANT EXPLAIN THAT!!!!
Science: I said the average would increase, and that just a single degree would cause hotter summers and colder...
Deniers: HA HA U SAID WATHER DOES NOT EQUAL CLIMATE!
Science: I actually never said that...
Deniers: IF THE GLOBAL IS WARMING HOW COME THEY HAVE ICE CREAM IN AUSTRAILIA?
Science: ...
Deniers: I WINS THE INTERNET ARGUNEMT!
Science: ...
Science: You wins.
 
2012-04-10 03:24:09 AM  

mr lawson: however a quick Google search shows about a 2:1 trend

[www2.ucar.edu image 504x331]


mr lawson: now take that with a little grain of salt because a much longer term trend line MIGHT show an overall decline.
/too lazy to look up


Here's some more data:

From Dr. Jeff Masters at Weather Underground with graph (new window--graph is unfortunately in PNG).

Daily temperature record counts for over 300 US weather stations:

www.wunderground.com

Statewide monthly records since the 1880s:

icecap.us

Another way of looking at things for 2010-11:

2.bp.blogspot.com

And the records aren't just limited to temperature. Dr. Masters again (new window), including this graph showing daily precipitation extremes (both high and low):

www.washingtonpost.com

What's disturbing about the last graph is the increase since about 1980 (about the time when the temperature trend line broke away from the solar-insolation curve and started matching CO2 levels). Over time, the number of weather records of any kind should decrease: In the first couple of years, just about every observation at a new location is a new record. After a century, only a handful of days in a year might be record-breaking. and yet something is driving the weather to a greater number of extremes than would normally be expected.

The earth's atmosphere shows signs of chaotic behavior. If it acts as a strange attractor (Watt's Up with That says no, of course, and a Science article is subscription-only), then any abrupt change in a pre-existing equilibrium (such as a near 40% increase in CO2 over a few centuries) could result in increasing oscillations about the mean (more anomalous weather and records of all kinds), until the system finally oscillates beyond a certain threshold and finds a new equilibrium around which to oscillate. This may not be a problem for the earth as a whole, but for a civilization whose infrastructure is optimized for the present equilibrium state, coping with a climate change in some unanticipated direction is going to be expensive and painful.

Unfortunately, even if chaos theory is completely wrong, any significant change in climate, regardless of its cause, is going to wreak havoc on a species already on the edge of a resource crisis, and no amount of denial will change that.
 
2012-04-10 03:32:52 AM  

prjindigo: seven thousand seven hundred misread thermometers out of fifty thousand on one day is NOT a trend... its just farking morons.

Did you know that the "lowest temperature" daily readings depended on when the morons went out to shake the thermometer down?

Not shiatting you.


If not, then you didn't know about maximum-minimum thermometers (new window):

golearngeo.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-04-10 10:11:10 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: I don't see anybody arguing against global warming, at least nobody with any kind of rational argument, which excludes trolls.


...this is Lord Monckton's entire argument. And he has more traction with deniers than Al Gore ever had with supporters, despite having the same amount of CC experience (that is, zero).
 
2012-04-10 10:16:51 AM  

roncofooddehydrator: Wasn't data just released suggesting that global warming might have been the result of the sun cycle and the ocean cycles moreso than strictly CO2, and that the global warming trend ended in 1997?

Article link

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x286]

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x290]


...another Daily Fail link. We keep telling you deniers that it's like linking to the Enquirer, but you just. Won't. Listen.

/Chris Monckton is their favorite "climate scientist", despite having as much firsthand knowledge of climate science as Al Gore.
 
2012-04-10 10:23:57 AM  

jwilson07: Yes, the Temperature was 99 degrees in LONDON!! Well, actually that was in 1906....so suck it doom and gloom boys.


Therefore, we should just give every oilfield in the world to ExxonMobil, and let them burn it all up.

ExxonMobil is one of the leaders in supplying disinformation about AGW. As a corporate partner of the Masters, they were one of only three entities that got to run ads during it. Every single one touted on how they were working to get America back on track in math and science. In other words, lying through their teeth. They muddy scientific study with unscientific claptrap so they can keep making their billions, and they wonder why the U.S. is 24th in the world in math and 17th in science?
 
2012-04-10 10:24:07 AM  

common sense is an oxymoron: prjindigo: seven thousand seven hundred misread thermometers out of fifty thousand on one day is NOT a trend... its just farking morons.

Did you know that the "lowest temperature" daily readings depended on when the morons went out to shake the thermometer down?

Not shiatting you.

If not, then you didn't know about maximum-minimum thermometers (new window):

[golearngeo.files.wordpress.com image 280x329]


Or, you know, the possibility that methods of measuring temperature exist with digital readout, thus allowing round-the-clock recording. Or that ground temperature records agree with satellite recordings. Or that multiple agencies around the world each have their own monitoring networks, and that they agree with one another.

Of course, this is the same guy that calculated that "Total global power generation is 33,917 watts per square meter per hour" and thought that climate change predictions were based on waste heat from all that electricity generation. He might not understand science all that well, or even scientific units.
 
2012-04-10 10:35:51 AM  

IlGreven: ...another Daily Fail link. We keep telling you deniers that it's like linking to the Enquirer, but you just. Won't. Listen.

/Chris Monckton is their favorite "climate scientist", despite having as much firsthand knowledge of climate science as Al Gore.


But his publications list is so impressive! He wrote: a report advocating that people with AIDS should be locked up in quarantine, a history book about the Anglican Order, five Sudoku books, and several newspaper editorials. He has a degree in "classics", and owns a shirt store.

He tried to claim to be a member of the House of Lords based on inheriting a minor title, and the House of Lords had to actually write an official letter informing him that he is not a member and should cease claiming to be one. He also claims to have cured himself of Graves' disease, despite the rest of the medical community claiming that no such cure is available.

You know, standard climate expert background. I've been to NASA's shirt store, and I must be right clear that it was quite mediocre. Good day, NASA Shirt Store! I said, Good Day!
 
2012-04-10 02:43:29 PM  
I blame it on that butterfly over there flapping its wings.
 
2012-04-10 09:28:52 PM  

IlGreven: HotIgneous Intruder: I don't see anybody arguing against global warming, at least nobody with any kind of rational argument, which excludes trolls.

...this is Lord Monckton's entire argument. And he has more traction with deniers than Al Gore ever had with supporters, despite having the same amount of CC experience (that is, zero).


Whut?
Lord Monckton cites me saying that I don't see anyone arguing aginst global warming?
whut.
 
2012-04-10 09:34:34 PM  
Doesn't matter what anybody here thinks.
Nobody's going to wreck the global economy -- at least for the first world nations -- by dong what it takes to curb see-oh-two emissions without the ability to offset the economic losses it would precipitate.

All of us will go to the bright light before anything changes enough to matter either way. The sky will not fall, people will adapt, people will scream that the sky is falling tomorrow or next week or next year for any number of reasons. The naked apes will keep screaming their superstitions at the clouds and killing each other for not being of their tribe. Some day someone will switch off a room full of servers and all of this will senseless prattling will be lost, as well.

And so it goes.
 
2012-04-10 09:58:44 PM  
 
2012-04-10 11:31:42 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Meanwhile, fifty NASA astronauts, engineers, and scientists with more than 1,000 years of combined professional experience sign a letter protesting the continuing claim that man-made carbon-dioxide is causing catastrophic climate change (new window).

Discredit that crowd, Derpers.

Linky, linky.


Challenge accepted.

Depending on how you classify some of those job titles, those 50 experts boil down to:

Administrators: 21
Engineers: 15
Astronauts: 7
Unspecified: 4
Programmers: 1
Trainers: 1
Meteorologists: 1
Climatologists: 0


And the meteorologist has five years of experience.

So "50 experts" was off by a factor of 50 (at best), and "1000 years of experience" by a factor of 200. Even by the loose standards of Fark AGW deniers, those are pretty sad numbers.
 
2012-04-11 01:56:59 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Meanwhile, fifty NASA astronauts, engineers, and scientists with more than 1,000 years of combined professional experience sign a letter protesting the continuing claim that man-made carbon-dioxide is causing catastrophic climate change (new window).

Discredit that crowd, Derpers.

Linky, linky.


common sense is an oxymoron: Depending on how you classify some of those job titles, those 50 experts boil down to:

Administrators: 21
Engineers: 15
Astronauts: 7
Unspecified: 4
Programmers: 1
Trainers: 1
Meteorologists: 1
Climatologists: 0

And the meteorologist has five years of experience.


Here's the web site of the one "meteorologist". From his own description of his background:

"At different times in his life, Tom has been:

•A Meteorologist.

•A NASA Intern before, during, and after the Moon Landings, and youngest ever (at that time) selected to NASA's Source Selection Board for Agencywide Computer services.

•Admin Director of Govt. Operations at Pratt & Whitney, where he wrote the code that solves the Polynomial Regression Algorithm now resident in millions of Texas Instruments calculators.

•Insurance Executive & Board member of insurance and other companies/orgs.

•President of NYU's Alumni Association.

•Vice Chairman, The New Netherland Museum, where in May, 2001, the New York City Council issued a proclamation honoring his historical contributions."

So HII is now counting a former 1960s-era NASA intern as the only meteorologist among his "fifty NASA astronauts, engineers, and scientists".

Then again, this is the same guy who brings up derp talking points and "just asks questions", thanks responders who correct him, and then starts again in the next thread as if nothing had happened. He's intentionally trolling.
 
2012-04-12 06:07:54 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.

A warm period in part of the world, for a few months, doesn't bother me. The flagrant, egregious hypocrisy of the warmer alarmists does.

WHATEVER the cool period, or cold spell, it makes no difference to the scammers. Cooling for fifteen years? Nothing, a blip. A strange jet stream pattern that shifts the U.S. warm for a few months? Proof positive of dangerous warming. Just because you're pussing out doesn't mean anyone else should be wringing out their knickers. A warm snap means as much for climate as a cold snap -- which is essentially nothing. You might admit that, if you were less dishonest.
 
2012-04-12 06:52:44 AM  
moanerific:
The same people that always say: 'Weather != Climate' are now using this as proof positive evidence for global warming?

Yep. Cold snaps prove nothing. Warm spells confirm AGW. That's how you can tell it's a hoax. People with science behind them don't cheat, lie, and make up data.
 
2012-04-12 06:58:06 AM  
Crunch61:
Then, the article's last paragraph states: "The solar irradiance began to drop in the 1990s, and a minimum will be reached by approximately 2040," Abdussamatov said. "It will cause a steep cooling of the climate on Earth in 15 to 20 years."

So, despite the dropping irradiance of the sun, the sun is still responsible for increased warming. Hmm.

The planet has been cooling since the late 90s. It will continue for a while.
 
2012-04-12 07:13:03 AM  
yingtong:
But unless you can point to a 'planetary weather laboratory', climatology is a statistical science.

It also happens to be a brach of science that's developed an unhealthy fascination with computer models, many of which get set to making predictions that can't be rigorously validated or invalidated until long after the researcher's career will be over.

I'm not saying that's wrong, and I'm not saying that's unethical. I am saying that the scientific method's ability to find and correct errors will have to work on a similar timescale.

Well said. Where we can check the models' predictions against reality of their future, they simply suck. Errors are several times larger than the error bars -- therefore, basic assumptions are wrong.
 
2012-04-12 07:15:32 AM  
Tricky Chicken:
If you want to make the skateboard stop, it would be a good idea to get me to stop throwing my balls around.

If you want to stop the train, you should probably concentrate on something other than my balls.

LOL
 
2012-04-12 07:36:20 AM  
Thunderpipes:
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?

My favorite is still "Global cooling caused by global warming."
 
2012-04-12 09:32:01 AM  

GeneralJim: The flagrant, egregious hypocrisy of the warmer alarmists does.


4.bp.blogspot.com

Mainstream science backed by literally hundreds of primary research studies (new window) isn't "alarmism".

"Alarmism":

GeneralJim: [Climate Scientists] have the ability to end up destroying civilization out of this, and sending us back to a new sort of hunter-gatherer society.


Not alarmism:

chimp_ninja: I've sent people to a couple different parts of NOAA, NASA, a journal (Proc. Royal Soc. A), the GCRP, Wikipedia (for current events), and the BBC (since someone mentioned what Phil Jones was saying in the media, and I wanted actual quotes, not excerpts).


Crazy talk:

GeneralJim: Because the only alternative is a freaking Democrat who wants to take my money and give it to the slut because the two-for-a-buck condoms are bankrupting her.


Crazier talk:
i40.tinypic.com
 
2012-04-12 09:56:18 AM  
What's really funny is that the green text thread shiatter waited 3 days to try to shotgun the thread with his blatantly incorrect bull shiat. That means he was either lurking, like myself, and waiting for the thread to die down so he could try to fill the end of the thread with green, or he actively went looking for a thread related to climate change so he could shot gun it. Obsess much?
 
2012-04-12 10:01:55 AM  
So is General Jim a troll, or is he really that...that...whatever he is. I can't tell. I'm trying to use Poe's Law to sort it out, but he doesn't seem to fit with any extremism to which I have previously been exposed. Well, other than the dude yelling at the stop sign outside of my office.
 
2012-04-12 10:10:08 AM  

Zafler: What's really funny is that the green text thread shiatter waited 3 days to try to shotgun the thread with his blatantly incorrect bull shiat. That means he was either lurking, like myself, and waiting for the thread to die down so he could try to fill the end of the thread with green


He always does that. I've gone through old Global Warming threads looking for half-remembered links or quotes a few times, and seeing Kermit has posted his BS days after the thread has gone quiet is a common occurrence.

It's kinda sad in a way - the only way he can "win" an argument is to post when there's little chance someone will rebut him.
 
2012-04-12 10:16:23 AM  

cubic_spleen: So is General Jim a troll, or is he really that...that...whatever he is. I can't tell. I'm trying to use Poe's Law to sort it out, but he doesn't seem to fit with any extremism to which I have previously been exposed. Well, other than the dude yelling at the stop sign outside of my office.


Conspiracy theorist, possibly of the true believer variety. He also claims knowledge of a secret and nontoxic cure for nearly all cancer. He believes the Shroud of Turin is physical evidence of Jesus exploding in a rush of high-frequency photons upon his death. He routinely claims the the UN commands a global conspiracy of scientists who invented greenhouse gas theory as a scheme towards one-world government, among other goals.

You know, normal things that sane people believe. That's why he generally waits for the thread to quiet down before trying to flood the end of it with a wall of wharrgarrbl-- less chance that he'll have to actually defend his ridiculous claims.
 
2012-04-12 10:36:54 AM  

Gunther: It's kinda sad in a way - the only way he can "win" an argument is to post when there's little chance someone will rebut him.


After a while, he'll start replying to his own posts and including lots of images, in sad attempts to "bury" all the evidence showing how wrong his beliefs are.

I forgot some of his other conspiracy theories:

Unsurprising birther crap:

GeneralJim: Why is Obama spending tens of thousands of dollars, and dorking around in court to avoid showing ANY of his records? Wasn't he supposed to be "President Transparency?" Didn't he sign an executive order his FIRST day as President, an order which was designed to allow him to prevent release of records? Really, all you Stepford Obama supporters really SHOULD want to know what it is that is being hidden. Even if it is not his birthplace, it's SOMETHING, and it sure looks like it's something big. Would you rather not know, and keep singing Kumbaya?


Regarding the Kyoto Treaty:

GeneralJim: Observing history, I am led to the conclusion that somewhere along this path, those who set up the "green revolution" will find their heads on pikes as a warning to others, and the damage will be stemmed long before it reaches the state I describe above. Nonetheless, those initiating the legislation will be seen as more horrendous mass murderers than even Stalin, with his paltry 25 million kills.


Regarding, well, whatever:

GeneralJim: What I truly find amusing is that this whole CO2/Global Warming scare was STARTED by Margaret Thatcher to justify nuclear plants, and, incidentally, crush the power of the coal miners union. Gotta love it!


(He kept going with this one long after links to Fourier's 1824 work on the greenhouse effect and Arrhenius's 1896 work on anthropogenic climate change were quoted to him.)
 
2012-04-12 10:38:35 AM  

chimp_ninja: cubic_spleen: So is General Jim a troll, or is he really that...that...whatever he is. I can't tell. I'm trying to use Poe's Law to sort it out, but he doesn't seem to fit with any extremism to which I have previously been exposed. Well, other than the dude yelling at the stop sign outside of my office.

Conspiracy theorist, possibly of the true believer variety. He also claims knowledge of a secret and nontoxic cure for nearly all cancer. He believes the Shroud of Turin is physical evidence of Jesus exploding in a rush of high-frequency photons upon his death. He routinely claims the the UN commands a global conspiracy of scientists who invented greenhouse gas theory as a scheme towards one-world government, among other goals.

You know, normal things that sane people believe. That's why he generally waits for the thread to quiet down before trying to flood the end of it with a wall of wharrgarrbl-- less chance that he'll have to actually defend his ridiculous claims.


And yet he recently claimed that he absolutely hates "junk science". If this guy is ever on your side in a scientific discussion, it's time to reassess your position.
 
Displayed 46 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 »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report