Remember me
▼ Content

News Flashes



Page 2 of 2<12
17-03-2017 22:14
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1622)
Wank wrote:
JizzGuzzler wrote:
It was actually Cyst that I was responding to, but it don't much matter. They're all the same. They like to sit and bitch all day. It make them feel important and worthy of something...who knows what.


Cyst tells us that a paper that references other papers and gives the actual references is "junk science". I guess because they aren't holding his hand so that he can look them up under a teacher's eye.

I usually prefer to rise above petty name-calling, but since it's Friday and this thread appears to have become a science-free bitching zone anyway, what the hell.

Rather apt for you two bosom buddies, don't you think? One produces it, the other consumes it.
17-03-2017 22:21
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Surface Detail wrote:
Wank wrote:
JizzGuzzler wrote:
It was actually Cyst that I was responding to, but it don't much matter. They're all the same. They like to sit and bitch all day. It make them feel important and worthy of something...who knows what.


Cyst tells us that a paper that references other papers and gives the actual references is "junk science". I guess because they aren't holding his hand so that he can look them up under a teacher's eye.

I usually prefer to rise above petty name-calling, but since it's Friday and this thread appears to have become a science-free bitching zone anyway, what the hell.

Rather apt for you two bosom buddies, don't you think? One produces it, the other consumes it.


That is all you have done for your entire time on this board.
17-03-2017 22:26
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(562)
JizzGuzzler


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, that's good! Well played.

See? I'm honest and objective, and I give credit where it's due.
17-03-2017 22:51
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1622)
GasGuzzler wrote:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, that's good! Well played.

See? I'm honest and objective, and I give credit where it's due.

Why, thank you Mr. Guzzler. Most sporting of you. Have a nice weekend.
17-03-2017 22:58
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Surface Detail wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, that's good! Well played.

See? I'm honest and objective, and I give credit where it's due.

Why, thank you Mr. Guzzler. Most sporting of you. Have a nice weekend.


You better hope I never find you because I would spank you. Your mother obviously never cared enough about you to teach you better.
17-03-2017 23:01
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(562)
Surface Detail wrote:
I usually prefer to rise above petty name-calling, but since it's Friday and this thread appears to have become a science-free bitching zone anyway, what the hell.


You want to get back to science? I'm in.

I've been thinking about what you said recently......

It is utterly illogical to claim that the increase in CO2 from 280 ppm to 405 ppm is due to some other unidentified cause, when the very obvious fact of human CO2 emissions easily accounts for it.


Well, I have to be honest. I am quite disappointed in the big warm up. In the past 4 cyclical warmups, we were clearly 2-2.5 degrees warmer.

Using your above quote and logic that man is the only explanation for the huge rise in CO2, could it also be said for the warmup not reaching expectations?


If it works the way you say it does, then CO2 causes a spike in water vapor, which shields the earth from the full force of the sun. Could this be the reason we're so cold? Just throwing random shit at the wall here. You got any idea why we can't seem to warm up to historic levels?


Fartsong wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!
Attached image:

18-03-2017 00:54
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
It was actually Cyst that I was responding to, but it don't much matter. They're all the same. They like to sit and bitch all day. It make them feel important and worthy of something...who knows what.


Cyst tells us that a paper that references other papers and gives the actual references is "junk science". I guess because they aren't holding his hand so that he can look them up under a teacher's eye.

You didn't post a paper, you posted a link to a post on a junkscience conspiracy blog that misrepresented the papers it referenced. I posted direct quotes from the papers themselves to show your junkscience conspiracy blog was lying. You hadn't even read the referenced papers yourself.

You are showing strong signs of being a pathological liar as well as a blithering idiot.
18-03-2017 00:59
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
Wank wrote:
JizzGuzzler wrote:
It was actually Cyst that I was responding to, but it don't much matter. They're all the same. They like to sit and bitch all day. It make them feel important and worthy of something...who knows what.


Cyst tells us that a paper that references other papers and gives the actual references is "junk science". I guess because they aren't holding his hand so that he can look them up under a teacher's eye.

I usually prefer to rise above petty name-calling, but since it's Friday and this thread appears to have become a science-free bitching zone anyway, what the hell.

Rather apt for you two bosom buddies, don't you think? One produces it, the other consumes it.


That is all you have done for your entire time on this board.


False. Surface Detail is usually very polite. I liked his new names for you both though. Very apt.


I gave up trying to be polite with dimwitted f-uckwits like you on this tiny obscure forum.

I'll reserve being polite for people who deserve respect.
Edited on 18-03-2017 01:10
18-03-2017 01:09
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, that's good! Well played.

See? I'm honest and objective, and I give credit where it's due.

Why, thank you Mr. Guzzler. Most sporting of you. Have a nice weekend.


You better hope I never find you because I would spank you. Your mother obviously never cared enough about you to teach you better.

You're revealing all your little secret fetishes.
18-03-2017 01:36
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Ceist wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, that's good! Well played.

See? I'm honest and objective, and I give credit where it's due.

Why, thank you Mr. Guzzler. Most sporting of you. Have a nice weekend.


You better hope I never find you because I would spank you. Your mother obviously never cared enough about you to teach you better.

You're revealing all your little secret fetishes.


Your mother must be so disappointed in you. Imagine a little twit like you who is afraid of his own shadow needing to call names via long distance and anonymity.
18-03-2017 04:04
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Wake wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, that's good! Well played.

See? I'm honest and objective, and I give credit where it's due.

Why, thank you Mr. Guzzler. Most sporting of you. Have a nice weekend.


You better hope I never find you because I would spank you. Your mother obviously never cared enough about you to teach you better.

You're revealing all your little secret fetishes.


Your mother must be so disappointed in you. Imagine a little twit like you who is afraid of his own shadow needing to call names via long distance and anonymity.


483 posts in about 6 weeks - and you STILL have not been able to quote directly from ANY published research paper to support your crank assertions. Why? Because your crank assertions aren't based on science and evidence.

All you have done is make shit up, lie compulsively, regurgitate shit from junkscience blogs run by non-scientists who demonstrably misrepresent papers you haven't even read. Oh..... and you continue to expose your bizarre little fetishes.
Edited on 18-03-2017 04:05
18-03-2017 15:46
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Ceist wrote:
Wake wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Wake wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, that's good! Well played.

See? I'm honest and objective, and I give credit where it's due.

Why, thank you Mr. Guzzler. Most sporting of you. Have a nice weekend.


You better hope I never find you because I would spank you. Your mother obviously never cared enough about you to teach you better.

You're revealing all your little secret fetishes.


Your mother must be so disappointed in you. Imagine a little twit like you who is afraid of his own shadow needing to call names via long distance and anonymity.


483 posts in about 6 weeks - and you STILL have not been able to quote directly from ANY published research paper to support your crank assertions. Why? Because your crank assertions aren't based on science and evidence.

All you have done is make shit up, lie compulsively, regurgitate shit from junkscience blogs run by non-scientists who demonstrably misrepresent papers you haven't even read. Oh..... and you continue to expose your bizarre little fetishes.


Actually what I've done is shown that you require having your hand held and consensus to believe anything other than what you are told to believe. But since the True Believers are all carbon copies I'm used to it.
19-03-2017 00:23
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
485 posts in 6 weeks and ALL you have done is make shit up, lie compulsively, and mindlessly swallow and regurgitate the same old long debunked evidence-free nonsense claims from junkscience conspiracy blogs run by non-scientist cranks.

What's even funnier, is that in your delusional conspiracy-addled mind, lazily parroting these nonsense blogger claims and never bothering to check the facts for yourself by actually READING the papers they reference, means you are 'thinking for yourself'.

Edited on 19-03-2017 01:12
20-03-2017 07:40
litesong
★★★★☆
(1232)
News flashes:
1) Present to date Global sea ice extent is ~ 3 million square kilometers LESS than to date average from early 1980's.
2) It appears that 2017 Arctic sea ice extent maximum could have reached its peak sometime ago, & like 2015 & 2016, will NOT reach 14 million square kilometers extent maximum.... just remarkable!! Arctic sea ice VOLUME growth should continue to or into April, but only as a bit more sea ice thickening, not as extra southward expansion frontage. All three years have been very close to the 14 million square kilometer mark, AND even for extended periods of time. But each of the trio has left a graph profile like a volcano with its top blown off & below the 14 mark.
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate News Flashes:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Incredible News! Climate Change Really *was* Just a Hoax *all along*!1418-07-2017 22:44
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact