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.

(Investors Business Daily)   At the present rate, Antarctic ice could cover the globe in 1000 years. EVERYBODY SLOWLY PANIC   (news.investors.com) divider line 120
    More: Unlikely, Antarctica, Antarctic ice, Secretary of State John Kerry, Attribution of recent climate change, ice, Arctic sea ice  
•       •       •

1509 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Feb 2013 at 6:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-23 01:13:16 PM
Because I get all my science news from investors.com.

"editorial=pro-business, anti-regulation propaganda and outright lies. What a shocker.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-02-23 01:30:19 PM
I think lying would be more effective if it was at least remotely plausible.
 
2013-02-23 02:11:11 PM

Lurking Fear: Because I get all my science news from investors.com.

"editorial=pro-business, anti-regulation propaganda and outright lies. What a shocker.


Don't worry, they aren't even good at investment news.  If I was a billionaire from investments, I'd be too busy having fun to write some bitter blog post about how I backed the wrong industry due to regulations.
 
2013-02-23 02:23:19 PM
Hey IBD, Stephen Hawking called, just to say he's still alive and thinks you are really really stupid.
 
2013-02-23 02:26:21 PM
"Real Science" is not so much "a science website" as "a blog run by Steven Goddard, the pseudonym of some electrical engineer who is a climate change skeptic".
 
2013-02-23 02:32:59 PM
But then there's the fact, which we noted last week, that the Arctic's sea ice gain from the record low of summer 2012 is a record of its own.

We need better science journalists.  He's not the first person to make that mistake.  Everybody does it, liberal and conservative columnists alike:  they cherry pick rate changes and pass it off as an improvement of a total.
 
2013-02-23 02:41:09 PM

Dinki: Hey IBD, Stephen Hawking called, just to say he's still alive and thinks you are really really stupid.


Thank you.  I normally try and remind people of this in any IBD thread.
 
2013-02-23 02:45:50 PM
imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-02-23 03:20:56 PM
B-b-b-but "professional fearmongers"...
 
2013-02-23 03:43:57 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: [imgs.xkcd.com image 461x295]


And we're done here.

/Any article on AGW that includes the word "alarmist" isn't worth the time or bandwidth to finish.
 
2013-02-23 05:00:14 PM

quatchi: PC LOAD LETTER: [imgs.xkcd.com image 461x295]

And we're done here.

/Any article on AGW that includes the word "alarmist" isn't worth the time or bandwidth to finish.


I like how he bashes alarmist while cherry-picking the most alarming data he can and presenting it in the most scary sounding way he can think of.
 
2013-02-23 05:17:49 PM
So....should I  be investing in Antarctic ice?
 
2013-02-23 05:25:08 PM

GAT_00: I like how he bashes alarmist while cherry-picking the most alarming data he can and presenting it in the most scary sounding way he can think of.


Me likey too.

Oblivious irony is best irony!
 
2013-02-23 05:52:40 PM
Do I have time to masturbate?
 
2013-02-23 06:03:47 PM
Love this guy's snark
i1057.photobucket.comi1057.photobucket.comi1057.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-23 06:14:22 PM
I bet this guy spells Al Gore's name as "algore" because that totally shows him.

/seriously, I never got that one in any way
 
2013-02-23 06:31:20 PM
For those of you that want some actual science, you can go here:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic-antarctic-ice.html
 
2013-02-23 06:34:30 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: [imgs.xkcd.com image 461x295]


You quick sonovabeeesh
 
2013-02-23 06:42:14 PM

dickfreckle: Do I have time to masturbate?


I've rubbed one out three times since I entered this thread.

/it's true
 
2013-02-23 06:44:51 PM

jake_lex: I bet this guy spells Al Gore's name as "algore" because that totally shows him.

/seriously, I never got that one in any way


not clever enough to go with Al'gore
 
2013-02-23 06:45:56 PM

SoupGuru: For those of you that want some actual science, you can go here:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic-antarctic-ice.html


Sure - you could choose to believe NASA, or you could choose to believe the people who exposed the shocking truth about Stephen Hawking. Choose wisely, libtard.
 
2013-02-23 06:46:19 PM

quatchi:

/Any article on AGW that includes the word "alarmist" isn't worth the time or bandwidth to finish.

But "denier" is just A-OK, amirite?
 
2013-02-23 06:46:44 PM
fine, i'll just move to my second home, at the McMurder station
 
2013-02-23 06:54:14 PM
BMulligan:

Sure - you could choose to believe NASA, or you could choose to believe the people who exposed the shocking truth about Stephen Hawking. Choose wisely, libtard.
Sure -- GO with people who are changing historical data over time to support their hypothesis.  That's how science works, right?


www.climate-skeptic.com
 
2013-02-23 06:54:18 PM
I keep CNBC on the TV as background noise when I work from home and they have IBD commercials on all the time... it's a shame that being involved in the stock market is practically a signifier of right-wing lunacy. Rick Santelli is about as crazy as they come and touts Shadow Government Stats from time to time. It's a shame that I have to filter stock market analysis through a derp-o-meter to get a reality based assessment. Makes things a lot more difficult.
 
2013-02-23 06:57:09 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: [imgs.xkcd.com image 461x295]


Came here for this, leaving satisfied.
 
2013-02-23 06:59:13 PM
imgs.xkcd.com

/obligatory
 
2013-02-23 07:01:41 PM

GeneralJim: But "denier" is just A-OK, amirite?


I prefer the more formal "AGW denial industry funded by major energy concerns" but whatever floats yer boat.
 
2013-02-23 07:03:09 PM

GeneralJim: BMulligan:

Sure - you could choose to believe NASA, or you could choose to believe the people who exposed the shocking truth about Stephen Hawking. Choose wisely, libtard.Sure -- GO with people who are changing historical data over time to support their hypothesis.  That's how science works, right?


[www.climate-skeptic.com image 490x270]



Unsupported accusations and vague hints of a conspiracy aren't part of how science works either.
 
2013-02-23 07:04:13 PM
Oh look, Mr. Green Text is here.  Here's a graph that will infuriate him:

i575.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-23 07:05:28 PM

LoneWolf343: [imgs.xkcd.com image 461x295]

/obligatory


Two of these have been posted since the thread went live, therefore by the time the thread dies there should be at least 15 more postings of that xkcd comic.
 
2013-02-23 07:06:09 PM

GAT_00: Oh look, Mr. Green Text is here.  Here's a graph that will infuriate him:

[i575.photobucket.com image 500x341]


Jesus, does he still do that?  I've had him on ignore for a while, not even because of his views, just because of how annoying the greentexting is.
 
2013-02-23 07:06:33 PM

GAT_00: Oh look, Mr. Green Text is here.  Here's a graph that will infuriate him:

[i575.photobucket.com image 500x341]


I like to think of him more as Mr. Green Ink, but whatever floats your boat.
 
2013-02-23 07:19:23 PM
I get my climate news from Investors Business Daily.

I get my investment tips from Discover Magazine.

It all balances out.
 
2013-02-23 07:19:32 PM

GAT_00:

Oh look, Mr. Green Text is here.  Here's a graph that will infuriate him:

[i575.photobucket.com image 500x341]

What do you mean, "infuriate" me?   I farking LOVE it when you make yourself look stupid.
 
2013-02-23 07:26:10 PM

Damnhippyfreak:

Unsupported accusations and vague hints of a conspiracy aren't part of how science works either.

No, that is how POLITICS works.   And AGW has totally lost the field of science, but is hoping for a win in the political arena.   So, you SUPPORT changing data after the fact to support a hypothesis?  Really?
 
2013-02-23 07:30:59 PM

Damnhippyfreak:

Unsupported accusations and vague hints of a conspiracy aren't part of how science works either.

And, by the way, this statement implies a lie.  I have provided quantified data, and illustrated the point.  NASA is in the uncomfortable position of releasing changes to data which they have already released, allowing others to compare, and determine what changes they have made.  Showing just how much NASA's historical dataset has changed in the last 12 years is the exact opposite of "Unsupported accusations and vague hints" as you claim.  Once again, you offer up an outright lie.  Your act is getting boring.
 
2013-02-23 07:36:44 PM
To summarize:

450 days of ice growth in part of Antartica (above 2,000 yards or so of elevation) is evidence. 315 months of above median warmth globally is not worth thinking about.

A one season record of new ice formation is proof of something besides the fact that record melts in the warm season produce record ice formation in the following cold season.

A totally made-up and highly implausible notion (such as Antarctica ice formation continuing uninterupted for 1,000 years for no reason, and thus covering the planet) is equal to decades of scientific research piling up real arguments and real evidence. Yup, that really convinces thinking people. Any BS that denialists pull out of their ass is an answer to science.

By the way, did I mention that global warming theory goes back to the 1830s; that the lab tests of the global warming effect of various gases such as CO2 were conducted in the basement of the Royal Society in London in 1859 by Irish scientist, John Tyndall (now the name of a major climate centre), in the year of Darwin's Origin of the Species, and that they have not been overturned since; and that, as George Monbiot pointed out in his blog, the "conspiracy theory" of global warming as fraud would require a conspiracy going back 170 years and involving several entire sciences?

Please stop posting BS from this denialist anti-science propaganda funnel. It's probably owned by the Koch Brothers or something.

If we could turn this site's spinning into electricity, we wouldn't need other green technologies. We'd have an infinite supply of BS-generated turbine power.
 
2013-02-23 07:38:17 PM
imgs.xkcd.com
I predict that at the current rate, this thread will be nothing but this xkcd comic in 12 hours.
 
2013-02-23 07:41:05 PM

brantgoose: To summarize:

450 days of ice growth in part of Antartica (above 2,000 yards or so of elevation) is evidence. 315 months of above median warmth globally is not worth thinking about.

A one season record of new ice formation is proof of something besides the fact that record melts in the warm season produce record ice formation in the following cold season.

A totally made-up and highly implausible notion (such as Antarctica ice formation continuing uninterupted for 1,000 years for no reason, and thus covering the planet) is equal to decades of scientific research piling up real arguments and real evidence. Yup, that really convinces thinking people. Any BS that denialists pull out of their ass is an answer to science.

By the way, did I mention that global warming theory goes back to the 1830s; that the lab tests of the global warming effect of various gases such as CO2 were conducted in the basement of the Royal Society in London in 1859 by Irish scientist, John Tyndall (now the name of a major climate centre), in the year of Darwin's Origin of the Species, and that they have not been overturned since; and that, as George Monbiot pointed out in his blog, the "conspiracy theory" of global warming as fraud would require a conspiracy going back 170 years and involving several entire sciences?

Please stop posting BS from this denialist anti-science propaganda funnel. It's probably owned by the Koch Brothers or something.

If we could turn this site's spinning into electricity, we wouldn't need other green technologies. We'd have an infinite supply of BS-generated turbine power.


Yeah, pretty much. That guy who always posts in green is going to take this as irrefutable proof that there is no global warming, and indeed no evidence for any climate change whatsoever, and we should all continue to pollute as fast as we possibly can because science is wrong. Probably all the way back to Newton, and maybe even Galileo.
 
2013-02-23 07:42:26 PM

brantgoose: By the way, did I mention that global warming theory goes back to the 1830s; that the lab tests of the global warming effect of various gases such as CO2 were conducted in the basement of the Royal Society in London in 1859 by Irish scientist, John Tyndall (now the name of a major climate centre), in the year of Darwin's Origin of the Species, and that they have not been overturned since; and that, as George Monbiot pointed out in his blog, the "conspiracy theory" of global warming as fraud would require a conspiracy going back 170 years and involving several entire sciences?


Of course, that's exactly what the denialists think...because most of them are also creationists and think "Darwinism" is one big conspiracy, too.
 
2013-02-23 07:55:06 PM

And, here's another falsification of AGW alarmist pseudo-science.  Look at the graph of various IPCC projections, based upon their modelling of climate -- You will see that not only do ALL of the projections miss the mark, but each projection increases the projected rate of warming beyond the last one.  The reason is simple: the models assume that carbon dioxide warms more than it actually does.  So, as the amount of carbon dioxide increases rapidly, more rapidly than expected, so should temperatures rise rapidly -- at least according to the models.  But they DON'T do that, when they are measured, rather than predicted.  Speaking of science philosophically, Ira Glickstein says "The graphic [too large for Fark inclusion, linked to below - GJ] is based on Figure 1-4 from the AR5 draft document and it clearly indicates something is and has been seriously wrong with the analysis methodology and computer models utilized by the IPCC researchers. It turns out that ALL FOUR IPCC reports, from 1990 to 2007 have seriously over-stated likely Global Warming, by factors of  TWO to FIVE. When actual observations made over a period of up to 22 years substantially contradict predictions based on a given climate theory, that theory must be modified or discarded completely."

When people ignore this FACT of science, and keep plugging away at shoring up the falsified hypothesis by altering historical data, the processes of science have been abandoned in favor of media manipulation to convince others that a falsehood is true.  And, the massively ironic point of all this is that exactly those people who are denying the processes of science refer to those who disagree with them as "deniers."  Saul Alinsky would be proud.


Ira Glickstein's graphic...
 
2013-02-23 08:21:45 PM

brantgoose:

By the way, did I mention that global warming theory goes back to the 1830s; that the lab tests of the global warming effect of various gases such as CO2 were conducted in the basement of the Royal Society in London in 1859 by Irish scientist, John Tyndall (now the name of a major climate centre), in the year of Darwin's Origin of the Species, and that they have not been overturned since; and that, as George Monbiot pointed out in his blog, the "conspiracy theory" of global warming as fraud would require a conspiracy going back 170 years and involving several entire sciences?

Well, as usual, you are completely full of it.  Certainly, the warming effects of carbon dioxide were known in 1859.  So what?  Who is denying that?  Your argument is a straw man.  The argument that the warming of carbon dioxide is multiplied three times by feedback systems within the atmosphere is a product from the late 1970s or so.  AGW panic-inducement REQUIRES large positive feedback.  It is not there.  EVERY measurement has shown otherwise; measurements have shown a large NEGATIVE feedback.  In fact, the only place where such massive positive feedback is shown is in the models themselves -- and they were built with that (now falsified) hypothesis.

And, no, your suggestion that a conspiracy must include everyone back to and including Tyndall is lunacy of the first order.  The conspiracy exists -- one can see the effects of it most clearly, unless one is in denial.  But, the conspiracy is just a literal handful of dunces.  Those who have, for the last 15 or 20 years been aggregating the data, and making "official" pronouncements.

I find it hugely amusing that those same people who claim that a dollar of oil company money forever pollutes the results of any research it funds will simply accept research paid for by a HUNDRED environmental activist group and government dollars.  If $1 dollar corrupts, would not $100 corrupt more?

Also, I know the LAST thing warmer alarmists want to do is actually LOOK at the world to check a hypothesis.  However, when one does that, one finds that ALL of the corruption of the IPCC has been in the direction of environmental activist groups.  You should know that if oil companies were trying to corrupt the process, they'd have MUCH better results.  In fact, as always, those claiming corruption are actually on the side of that corruption.  After one commits murder, it probably is a reasonable tactic to start pointing fingers and screaming "murderer" at the top of one's voice -- but when that is the ONLY tactic one has, it loses its impact.

 
2013-02-23 08:26:22 PM

brantgoose:

Please stop posting BS from this denialist anti-science propaganda funnel. It's probably owned by the Koch Brothers or something.

And, amusingly, here are (let me get the quote...) "Unsupported accusations and vague hints of a conspiracy" from someone making fun, in the same post, of people with factually-supported simple statements of scientific malfeasance.  Leftists simply cannot avoid this self-dug trap, their behavior suggests.
 
2013-02-23 08:30:14 PM

Gyrfalcon:

That guy who always posts in green is going to take this as irrefutable proof that there is no global warming, and indeed no evidence for any climate change whatsoever, and we should all continue to pollute as fast as we possibly can because science is wrong. Probably all the way back to Newton, and maybe even Galileo.

Wow.  I though the goose's stupid conspiracy theory was the worst possible idiocy.  Congratulations, you have surpassed him. Surpassed? Hell, you lapped him.
 
2013-02-23 08:31:08 PM
Big deal! There's something from Antarctica that will encompass the world 27,000 hours after it reaches civilization.
 
2013-02-23 08:40:31 PM

jake_lex: I bet this guy spells Al Gore's name as "algore" because that totally shows him.

/seriously, I never got that one in any way


I can't vouch for the truth of it, but it was explained to me this way: Way back, Rush Limbaugh had some skit bashing President Clinton as some sort of mad scientist or something, with Vice-President Gore as his Igor-like flunky, named Algore (pronounced all as one word, like Igor).  Later, it got changed to algore, because removing the capital letter is totes a sick burn, and really sticks it to those stupid libbo creeps, or something.  Conservative humor!

Yes, it's very lame, and the fact that wingers still cling desperately to it is actually kind of pathetic and sad, but to be fair, they're really not good at satire.  At all.
 
2013-02-23 08:43:51 PM

IlGreven:

brantgoose: By the way, did I mention that global warming theory goes back to the 1830s; that the lab tests of the global warming effect of various gases such as CO2 were conducted in the basement of the Royal Society in London in 1859 by Irish scientist, John Tyndall (now the name of a major climate centre), in the year of Darwin's Origin of the Species, and that they have not been overturned since; and that, as George Monbiot pointed out in his blog, the "conspiracy theory" of global warming as fraud would require a conspiracy going back 170 years and involving several entire sciences?

Of course, that's exactly what the denialists think...because most of them are also creationists and think "Darwinism" is one big conspiracy, too.

Apparently, there is no statement so stupid that nobody will double down on it.
/ Oh, and you forgot "Young Earth creationist, so you missed maximum derp.

i48.tinypic.com
 
2013-02-23 09:04:15 PM

GeneralJim: Damnhippyfreak: Unsupported accusations and vague hints of a conspiracy aren't part of how science works either.
No, that is how POLITICS works.   And AGW has totally lost the field of science, but is hoping for a win in the political arena.   So, you SUPPORT changing data after the fact to support a hypothesis?  Really?



Simply repeating an unsupported accusation (together with some mind-reading) doesn't make what you claim any more true.
 
2013-02-23 09:10:55 PM
Anybody else wondering if GJ gets paid by the word?
 
Displayed 50 of 120 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report