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.

(NewsBusters)   NY Gov. Cuomo: Look at these past two years, we have had back to back once a century storm, see global warming. Facts: Ooh we had three worse ones in 1954 alone, and dozens over the past 200 years   (newsbusters.org) divider line 39
    More: Interesting, Andrew Cuomo, New York, global warming, Battery Park, hurricanes, Jesse Jackson, New London, Tim Carney  
•       •       •

892 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Nov 2012 at 1:31 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-11 06:17:07 PM
3 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: Funny how there's a ready-made canned rebuttal to everything that seems to contradict AGW.


I've got a shelf full of books that are ready-made, canned rebuttals to anything that contradicts heliocentrism, a spherical earth, the luminiferous ether and the existence of phlogiston. It's almost as if there were a worldwide conspiracy spanning the last five hundred years called science.
2012-11-11 04:38:07 PM
3 votes:
SevenizGud:

Now you've limited yourself to 10 years of data?

In the next thread, are you going to limit yourself to the temperature between 5 and 11am?
2012-11-11 05:34:14 PM
2 votes:
SevenizGud


2012-11-11 04:03:10 PM
Nothing says "getting owned" like posting the, you know, actual last 15 years of HADCRUT3 data without any changes from those reported by Hadley Center themselves.

2012-11-11 04:09:42 PM
The trend line for the, you know, data.

2012-11-11 04:15:35 PM
Yeah, nothing says "out of your depth" more than posting the, you know, actual data.

2012-11-11 04:21:59 PM
Good to know your aren't, you know, a totally biased shill for the watermelons.

2012-11-11 04:27:34 PM
Yeah, because there's nothing more laughable than posting the last 15 years of, you know, the actual data.

2012-11-11 04:45:29 PM
Why don't you just gut the main argument, and, you know, show that it really has warmed in the last 15 years?
2012-11-11 04:53:17 PM
Here's another one for you, tell me how much it would really be warming if it were, you know, actually warming.


2012-11-11 05:15:53 PM

Yeah, because if there is anything that goes against credibility, it is posting the, you know, actual data for the last 15 years.
 


I don't know what this is, but I'm pretty sure it's diagnosable.
2012-11-11 01:58:54 PM
2 votes:

dead: That goes to prove the point. One storm, in recorded history, and you're ready to wet your pants like a little girl. You are ready to give control of every facet of your existence to the government because you can't handle a little water.


You're convinced that the government is using climate change as a tool to take control of our lives and we're the scared ones?  Projection, you has it.
2012-11-11 01:50:50 PM
2 votes:

deschinc: Jake Havechek: abdicating your rights to government control

Easy there, nobody is coming to steal your MREs and canned water.

I don't know. It depends on which varieties he's got down in the bunker. I'm not wasting any ammo for country captain chicken but some chicken breast with cavatelli or some hash might peak peeve my interest.


FTFY

/Pet pique
2012-11-11 01:43:41 PM
2 votes:

dead: Fringe scare story picked up by Time magazine in the 1970s. Yeah. Ok. Sure. Believe what you want- which is apparently that government can control your life better than you can.


Because a weekly magazine like Time never picks up on fringe stories and never gets things wrong. Never.

/and you are the one arguing over government control. we are arguing over the very real changes in climate.
2012-11-11 01:40:51 PM
2 votes:
0.tqn.com
2012-11-12 10:03:42 AM
1 votes:

TIKIMAN87: Harbinger of the Doomed Rat: TIKIMAN87: James F. Campbell: [0.tqn.com image 500x334]

It would cost trillions and trillions of dollars.

Trillions and trillions, eh? Must be that Republican Math I've been hearing about.

Well Obama has a good start with Solyndra, that was what... 500-600 bilion dollars lost?

LOL what a joke.


$535 million loan guarantee is now 500 billion? Are you retarded?
2012-11-11 10:49:23 PM
1 votes:

chuckufarlie: [www.petitionproject.org image 850x365]

31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs


Signatories are approved for inclusion in the Petition Project list if they have obtained formal educational degrees at the level of Bachelor of Science or higher in appropriate scientific fields. The petition has been circulated only in the United States.

The current list of petition signers includes 9,029 PhD; 7,157 MS; 2,586 MD and DVM; and 12,715 BS or equivalent academic degrees. Most of the MD and DVM signers also have underlying degrees in basic science.

All of the listed signers have formal educations in fields of specialization that suitably qualify them to evaluate the research data related to the petition statement. Many of the signers currently work in climatological, meteorological, atmospheric, environmental, geophysical, astronomical, and biological fields directly involved in the climate change controversy.


By the 1980s Teller was nuts. So go with that.
2012-11-11 10:24:02 PM
1 votes:

chuckufarlie: As for his credentials, he was good enough to be asked to work for the IPCC, he is good enough to testify in front of Congress.


Are you sure you want to use that as a measure of merit? Elmo has testified in front of Congress.
2012-11-11 09:10:36 PM
1 votes:

chuckufarlie: what about all of those climate scientists who are "deniers"?


Yes, the 2% or so who are clearly know what's up, not the 98% who analyze evidence. But keep telling yourself all the data is biased. Make an Unskewed Climate Model to show all those stupid libs what's what.
2012-11-11 08:03:32 PM
1 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: common sense is an oxymoron: Link, complete with original sources

Funny how there's a ready-made canned rebuttal to everything that seems to contradict AGW.



That's how reality works.


I'm beginning to consider the phenomenon of unintentional conspiracies among AGW advocates; something like mass hysteria.

[Actually, it's more like rabid career and grant gravy-train protectionism, but I digress.]



So now the success of reality-based arguments against ACC deniers is evidence of a conspiracy? How can you live knowing that the universe itself is conspiring against you?
2012-11-11 06:28:37 PM
1 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: Because it makes no sense to "believe" in AGW. It's either real, as provable beyond a doubt by science, or it's not. AGW is not provable beyond any doubt and will probably never be for anyone living right now.


Science isn't a courtroom.
2012-11-11 06:20:26 PM
1 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: Monkeyhouse Zendo: we can learn to set reasonable limits on our resource usage so as to avoid greater costs down the line.

Bullshiat. The attempted Kyoto protocols prove there is no political will to do this trick of magical thinking.
When you tell people what it means for their lives, nobody will listen to you for more than one minute.
And no politician will or would dare go along with it.
You do what needs to be done and send me a postcard from your short unhappy life there.


big-kahuna-ventures.com
2012-11-11 04:41:39 PM
1 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: Ooogah-BOOGAH-BOOH!


Not trying to scare you, just pointing out that the energy is going somewhere.

I've pretty much given up on reasoning with people who don't understand even a high school level treatment of thermodynamics. Things like what constitutes a thermodynamically closed system just don't figure into their understanding of the world.

Please understand, I'm not saying that you're stupid. I'm saying that you don't have the necessary tools to think about the problem in any useful manner.
2012-11-11 04:30:47 PM
1 votes:
The Earth has warmed in the past.

Therefore, man cannot affect climate.

Checkmate, libs.
2012-11-11 04:28:30 PM
1 votes:
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-11-11 04:27:18 PM
1 votes:

SevenizGud: Mrtraveler01: Because it completely destroys the narrative that he's trying to make?

Yeah, because it's possible to destroy the narrative of posting the last 15 years of data. Temperature in 1971 or 1888 has so much to do with the last 15 years, amirite?

But hey, guys, it's only 15 years, maybe at some point in the future it will change and you will all get the increase in temperature that you crave.


Yeah, but as you just taught us, all we need to do is cherrypick the data in a way to make ourselves feel better about it like you just did. ;)
2012-11-11 04:11:32 PM
1 votes:

SevenizGud: Dude, stop crying. The underlying URL of the picture itself will tell you that it is the trend line. And the trend line for what, you may sob and boo-hoo?


The bolded part indicates why you are out of your depth on this issue.
2012-11-11 03:55:30 PM
1 votes:

SevenizGud: Yeah, this happened now, instead of 15 years ago because of all the global warming we've had in the last 15 years:

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.


www.skepticalscience.com

From this link
2012-11-11 03:30:52 PM
1 votes:
Yeah, this happened now, instead of 15 years ago because of all the global warming we've had in the last 15 years:

www.woodfortrees.org

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
2012-11-11 02:59:46 PM
1 votes:
And the glaciers aren't actually disappearing. They're playing peek-a-boo.
2012-11-11 02:47:33 PM
1 votes:
Remember: the people insisting there is no global warming are the same people who cited unskewed polls and called Nate Silver a stupid hack.
2012-11-11 02:43:18 PM
1 votes:
Ah yes...the weekly climate change thread. I get to play my favorite game:

Spot the Derptard GOPers Who Have Never Taken a College-level Chemistry, Physics, or Meteorology Class.

Some folks would say that the dumbest people around are 9-11 "Truthers" or "Birthers." I say it's the Climate Change Denialists.
2012-11-11 02:27:02 PM
1 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: Teufelaffe: HotIgneous Intruder: We're in an interglacial warming period kids.
It's been warming for 13,000 years.
It's how the Chesapeake Bay formed, you know.
Google it. Study it out

FTFY

You hate facts, don't you?


At least we pay attention to facts. Go get more talking points from unskewedclimate.com, where math is optional.
2012-11-11 02:16:51 PM
1 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: We're in an interglacial warming period kids.
It's been warming for 13,000 years.
It's how the Chesapeake Bay formed, you know.
Google it. Study it out


FTFY
2012-11-11 02:05:42 PM
1 votes:

Mrbogey: The conditions that created Sandy weren't exceptional.


So even THIS is a lie? The climatologists saying the conditions WERE exceptional are lying? You know better? Can I ask where you received your degree? Can I see some of your published work?
2012-11-11 02:03:10 PM
1 votes:

dead: 6 of the top 10 most expensive storms were before 1950. Well before global cooling (as we called it in the 1970's) or global warming (what we called it in the 1990's) or as we call it now climate change (which, well, duh- has been happening since the earth cooled and formed an atmosphere).


This paragraph, alone, is evidence enough to discount anything you say in the future on anything. Ever.
2012-11-11 02:01:06 PM
1 votes:
NEW YORK CITY: Because five million people living effectively on the beach is a GREAT IDEA!

Yee-haw, idiot humans. Yee-haw.
2012-11-11 01:56:40 PM
1 votes:

Mrbogey: GAT_00: More flood damage than the city has ever seen? Nah, nothing to worry about.

I don't think the actual land cared if it flooded before people moved there.

I don't have to be in the woods to know that a tree falls. I don't believe that no tree has ever fallen unless I'm there.


And you don't believe in scientific consensus, built from decades of study.

So we get it. You ENJOY willful ignorance...
2012-11-11 01:55:28 PM
1 votes:

dead: The point I'm making is, stop, take a deep breath, and do some analysis before abdicating your rights to government control.


You mean like the decades of analysis and consensus?

Abdicating your rights? Talk about a pants wetting whiny statement. "Their going to put me in a camp!!!"

Jesus. You are one gigantic pussy.
2012-11-11 01:45:49 PM
1 votes:
encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.comencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
2012-11-11 01:43:15 PM
1 votes:
Libertarians don't understand positive liberty.
2012-11-11 01:41:12 PM
1 votes:
When you have to go back more than half a century to prove your point, you might be on shaky ground. Yes, even in matters of climate and weather events.
2012-11-11 01:36:50 PM
1 votes:
abdicating your rights to government control

Easy there, nobody is coming to steal your MREs and canned water.
2012-11-11 12:04:09 PM
1 votes:

GAT_00: dead: NewsBusters might be derp (never been there, can't say) but I have some faith in NPR, which published this story shortly after Sandy:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/10/31/163960418/americas-most-exp e nsive-storms?live=1%3Futm_source%3DNPR&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaig n=20121031

If you want to do something, don't allow people to build as densely and as expensively close to a hurricane or strong storm zone. But if you do, realize that you're going to go though periods of expensive cleanup and death. Ask yourself the question, "does the reward outweigh the risk?"

6 of the top 10 most expensive storms were before 1950. Well before global cooling (as we called it in the 1970's) or global warming (what we called it in the 1990's) or as we call it now climate change (which, well, duh- has been happening since the earth cooled and formed an atmosphere).

The point I'm making is, stop, take a deep breath, and do some analysis before abdicating your rights to government control. What can we do to control the climate (which is not weather- a common misconception) to prevent this in the future? Is there anything we can do? Perhaps it would be easier to control weather before we tried to control the climate.

1. More expensive storms in the past, adjusted for inflation, does not account for weaker structures. Older homes were much less able to withstand severe weather events.
2. NYC's flood defenses are better today than they have been in the past and they saw worse floods than any time in recorded history. The Battery Tunnel has no flood barriers partly because it had never needed them before.
3. Anyone who references Global Cooling, which was a fringe scare story even then disproved and only had 10% of the climate community in support, is not intending to be honest. Your "analysis" is worth nothing.


Prove number 1. Do you know the structures were weaker? Where is your support for such a hypothesis? Have you ever looked at older construction? It's far stronger than you think. Given the chose of a house from before 1900 and one from 1970 to ride out the storm, I'll pick the older house every damn time.

That goes to prove the point. One storm, in recorded history, and you're ready to wet your pants like a little girl. You are ready to give control of every facet of your existence to the government because you can't handle a little water.

Fringe scare story picked up by Time magazine in the 1970s. Yeah. Ok. Sure. Believe what you want- which is apparently that government can control your life better than you can.

You're entitle to your opinion, but it's worth nothing.
2012-11-11 11:14:51 AM
1 votes:

vpb: Since it's NewsBusters I'm assuming that it's total BS, like every other story of theirs.


Well, of course. NewsBusters is like the Onion, but, y'know, significantly less funny.
2012-11-11 11:10:38 AM
1 votes:
Good lord. I swear, if flash smog incidents started occurring again, Republicans would claim that they were natural because they occurred in the 40s-60s.
2012-11-11 09:26:20 AM
1 votes:
I loooove cherry picking time!
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report