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.

(Slate)   Here it is, the only pie graph you'll ever need to deal with the next climate-change-denying idiot   (slate.com) divider line 954
    More: Spiffy, pie charts, climate change  
•       •       •

37668 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Dec 2012 at 3:50 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-14 12:33:46 PM

SVenus: RUH ROH

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/leak-of-climate-panel-d ra fts-speaks-to-need-for-new-process/


SVenus: RUH ROH

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/leak-of-climate-panel-d ra fts-speaks-to-need-for-new-process/


Posted in the new GW thread for sake of convenience.
 
2012-12-14 12:54:28 PM

SVenus: RUH ROH

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/leak-of-climate-panel-d ra fts-speaks-to-need-for-new-process/


FTFA:
It is extremely likely* that human activities have caused more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature since the 1950s. There is high confidence that this has caused large-scale changes in the ocean, in the cryosphere, and in sea level in the second half of the 20th century. Some extreme events have changed as a result of anthropogenic influence. [*In panel terminology, "extremely likely" denotes a 95-percent likelihood.]

RUH ROH indeed ... I guess you're going to stop your anti-science campaign now?? It is your link after all.
 
2012-12-14 05:04:24 PM

Farking Canuck: Slam1263: So, has Cananananda started to out smoke stack scrubbers on their power plants yet?

Or was Acid Rain just another non issue once the US jumped through the hoops?

I love it when idiots point to acid rain, y2k and the ozone layer as non-issues when, in reality, they are scientific and political success stories. The experts in the field warned of dangers and proposed solutions, politicians and companies heeded the warnings and implemented actions to mitigate the damages and all the costs associated with the damages.

This should be the case with AGW but the anti-science crowd took their cues from the big tobacco trials of the 70's and played the "you can never be 100% sure" card to delay any action. Now there has been much less mitigation than there should have been at this point and we will end up paying far more in the long run.

As for your badly worded question above ... I cannot speak for all of Canada but I can address the province of Ontario. We have reduced our coal use by 90% since 2003 and continue on a course of moving completely away from coal. We use hydro, nuclear, natural gas and wind to generate most of our electricity.

Did you have a point??


Yes. My point is thus; you are a hypocrit.

In that, if the datum prove your point, it's OK, but if it doesn't it's not.

Maybe even calling you a hypocrit is too extreme, as would using the term idiot to describe you.

Church of AGW zealot is a more apt description.

As I stated, I don't put much stock in others religious ideas. AGW, too me, is just another quasi-scientific religion, much like Christian Scientist, and Scientologist.

As for the Acid Rain, Y2K, and other issues, I am old enough to have been able to fleece the followers. Those predictions were proven, by time itself, to be invalid. The US spent over one trillion dollars on Acid Rain, to protect America's Hat from extinction, and you Norks spent squat to protect yourselves, or your Betters in the south. Fairly typical reactions I will add.

You don't have to like what I am stating, but you not liking something dosen't invalidate it.

But please, continue with your sophmoric rails, it really does humor me.
 
2012-12-14 09:10:37 PM

Slam1263:
Did you have a point??

Yes. My point is thus; you are a hypocrit.

In that, if the datum prove your point, it's OK, but if it doesn't it's not.

Maybe even calling you a hypocrit is too extreme, as would using the term idiot to describe you.

Church of AGW zealot is a more apt description.

As I stated, I don't put much stock in others religious ideas. AGW, too me, is just another quasi-scientific religion, much like Christian Scientist, and Scientologist.

As for the Acid Rain, Y2K, and other issues, I am old enough to have been able to fleece the followers. Those predictions were proven, by time itself, to be invalid. The US spent over one trillion dollars on Acid Rain, to protect America's Hat from extinction, and you Norks spent squat to protect yourselves, or your Betters in the south. Fairly typical re ...


So you don't actually have a point. All you want to do is run around calling people names like a petulant little child.

In fact ... the only remotely evidence based claim I've seen you make was in the other thread where you incorrectly claimed that volcano output of CO2was larger than human's. You were slapped down hard with links to primary research ... and you seem to be afraid to revisit the topic.

Probably because you are too much of a child to admit you are wrong.
 
Displayed 4 of 954 comments

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report