Remember me
▼ Content

An open letter to all members of Climate-debate.com



Page 2 of 2<12
01-11-2015 07:17
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Into the Night wrote:
I've noticed the Kiddie Pool has been rather quiet since it was built.


Now here I was thinking that it was your Data Mine thread that was the "Kiddie Pool" for people who know less than a 5th grader about basic science but want to play with carefully cherry-picked kilobytes of 'numbers' from carefully selected individual surface stations (preferably ones from cold places) and paste them into an Excel spreadsheet on their PCs to 'prove' mainstream science, the laws of physics, the overwhelming consilience of evidence from a broad range of fields, and all the world's scientists (who MUST be 'fudging data' because you just don't like what they are saying), are wrong.

Considering global climate models use
Petabytes of data, I'd say you kiddies could have fun playing with 'numbers' for hundreds of thousands of years to come.

You could even color-code the numbers in your spreadsheet to make them look more interesting in case you get bored after your afternoon nap.



Edited on 01-11-2015 07:31
01-11-2015 09:41
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote It doesn't matter who owns the site or anything else they may stand for.

In this day of misinformation, spin, and re-framing the issue for political and monetary gain, who owns the site is of key interest.


That is bulverism. That is a fallacy. Valid arguments can be made even from a biased source. From what I've examined on this site, I've yet to even find a bias. The argument presented is clear and reasonable. The supporting data is verifiable.
01-11-2015 10:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Into the Night wrote:I've noticed the Kiddie Pool has been rather quiet since it was built.


There is a topic there about over population.

If a thread about killing loads of humans is not instantly trolling what the hell is?

There is no over population problem at all. The more humans the more ability to grow food we have. Propagating this drivel is just evil.

Check out this set of videos;

https://overpopulationisamyth.com/


Tim, were you aware that the website you are propagating is run by a 'pro-life' religious group which campaigns against contraception and abortion? Their content is not based on published research. It's pseudoscience propaganda.

Spreading anti-contraception religious propaganda (eg lying about the effectiveness of condoms) played a big role in spreading HIV in poverty- stricken countries as well as increasing poverty. They also campaign against vaccinations.

This is a classic case of poisoning the well, are at the least, bulverism. I have examined the sight and do not find any problem with it's data sources, it's reasoning, or it's conclusions. It doesn't matter who owns the site or anything else they may stand for.

Remember, I am picky about where quoted data comes from. In all cases on this site, the data they use is substantiated, verifiable, sources quoted, methodology explained, etc.

Even a cursory examination of their claims shows it's not an evidence-based website using valid scientific research. PRI are religiously motivated zealots who disagree with the use of contraception as well as abortion and vaccinations. It's not difficult to find out who they are and what they do.

So what?
Ceist wrote:
Considering the fact that you have shown in your posts that you reject basic physics and mainstream science about even the natural 'greenhouse' effect, I question your ability to understand the difference between evidence-based science and evidence-free religious pseudoscience propaganda.

I reject the nonscience of greenhouse gas warming the Earth. You have not provided any evidence to support it other than fudged or manufactured data.
Ceist wrote:
If you want to reference religious websites to support your religious/ideological beliefs that's fine, but don't try to pass it off as an authoritative science source and not expect to get called on it.

I am not trying to pass it off as an authoritative science source. Whatever gave you the idea that I was? I am simply stating that it is a reasonable argument with verifiable sources of data. If you don't like the data, complain to the UN and the governments of the United States and China about it.
01-11-2015 10:37
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Into the Night wrote:
I reject the nonscience of greenhouse gas warming the Earth. You have not provided any evidence to support it other than fudged or manufactured data.

Like I said, your statements show you are incapable of telling the difference between crackpot pseudoscience nonsense and evidence-based science. They also show evidence of conspiracy ideation where all the scientists in the world MUST have some massive evil plot to 'fudge data' because you don't like what science is clearly saying.


I'll leave you to play with cherry-picked 'numbers' in your own little infants pool thread: I'll refer to it as the The Rabbit Hole, where crackpot conspiracy theorists and lay people who have no clue about science can dive down a hole and pretend the real world doesn't exist. It's a special place where no science and no evidence is required, and where one can believe '6 impossible things before breakfast' while mathturbating with 'numbers' because they don't really even know what to do with them.




Edited on 01-11-2015 10:40
01-11-2015 11:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
I reject the nonscience of greenhouse gas warming the Earth. You have not provided any evidence to support it other than fudged or manufactured data.

Like I said, your statements show you are incapable of telling the difference between crackpot pseudoscience nonsense and evidence-based science. They also show evidence of conspiracy ideation where all the scientists in the world MUST have some massive evil plot to 'fudge data' because you don't like what science is clearly saying.


I'll leave you to play with cherry-picked 'numbers' in your own little infants pool thread: I'll refer to it as the The Rabbit Hole, where crackpot conspiracy theorists and lay people who have no clue about science can dive down a hole and pretend the real world doesn't exist. It's a special place where no science and no evidence is required, and where one can believe '6 impossible things before breakfast' while mathturbating with 'numbers' because they don't really even know what to do with them.


You seem to be trying to justify fudging data. You also seem to be trying to justify manufactured data.

Meh. Leave the Data Mine then. Nothing there interests you.
01-11-2015 11:35
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
I reject the nonscience of greenhouse gas warming the Earth. You have not provided any evidence to support it other than fudged or manufactured data.

Like I said, your statements show you are incapable of telling the difference between crackpot pseudoscience nonsense and evidence-based science. They also show evidence of conspiracy ideation where all the scientists in the world MUST have some massive evil plot to 'fudge data' because you don't like what science is clearly saying.


I'll leave you to play with cherry-picked 'numbers' in your own little infants pool thread: I'll refer to it as the The Rabbit Hole, where crackpot conspiracy theorists and lay people who have no clue about science can dive down a hole and pretend the real world doesn't exist. It's a special place where no science and no evidence is required, and where one can believe '6 impossible things before breakfast' while mathturbating with 'numbers' because they don't really even know what to do with them.


You seem to be trying to justify fudging data. You also seem to be trying to justify manufactured data.

Meh. Leave the Data Mine then. Nothing there interests you.

Zealous religious or political ideological beliefs combined with ignorance seems to lead to even more ideologically induced stupidity, extreme confirmation bias, and crackpot conspiracy ideation. For example, the conspiracy ideation that thousands of scientists all over the world are involved in a massive conspiracy to 'fudge' or manufacture data'. I find that interesting.



01-11-2015 11:54
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Ceist wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Into the Night wrote:I've noticed the Kiddie Pool has been rather quiet since it was built.


There is a topic there about over population.

If a thread about killing loads of humans is not instantly trolling what the hell is?

There is no over population problem at all. The more humans the more ability to grow food we have. Propagating this drivel is just evil.

Check out this set of videos;

https://overpopulationisamyth.com/


Tim, were you aware that the website you are propagating is run by a 'pro-life' religious group which campaigns against contraception and abortion? Their content is not based on published research. It's pseudoscience propaganda.

Spreading anti-contraception religious propaganda (eg lying about the effectiveness of condoms) played a big role in spreading HIV in poverty- stricken countries as well as increasing poverty. They also campaign against vaccinations.


I was not aware of that. Which video says that condoms do not stop the spread of VD?
01-11-2015 11:55
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
trafn wrote:
@Tim the plumber - given what Ceist just posted, I wonder, are you pro-life?

If so, does that in any way influence your comments that you make here?


I am an atheist. I am in favor of reasonable abortion availibility. I find the system in the UK fine. I find that it is only the USA where this topic is central to public debate.
01-11-2015 11:57
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote It doesn't matter who owns the site or anything else they may stand for.

In this day of misinformation, spin, and re-framing the issue for political and monetary gain, who owns the site is of key interest.


It may be of interest but it is utterly irrelivant to the valididty of the argument.

You just don't get the idea of science do you?
01-11-2015 11:59
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Ceist wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:

If it's shared ideas then people will comment upon each other's ideas. This will mean that ideas you don't like you will comment upon negatively. This will upset some.

I propose a better sub-forum title would be ecco chamber. [/color]


Speaking of Echo chambers: Have you noticed that the anti-science views you cling to seem to be just an Echo of the views of the anti-science evangelical Cornwall Alliance against Global Warming, and Roy Spencer who is a board member?

Is Roy your messiah against the 'evil scientists' of mainstream science?

http://www.cornwallalliance.org/2009/05/01/evangelical-declaration-on-global-warming/


Attacking the people rather than the argument presented is a sure sign that you kno wthat you have lost the argument.
01-11-2015 13:03
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:

If it's shared ideas then people will comment upon each other's ideas. This will mean that ideas you don't like you will comment upon negatively. This will upset some.

I propose a better sub-forum title would be ecco chamber. [/color]


Speaking of Echo chambers: Have you noticed that the anti-science views you cling to seem to be just an Echo of the views of the anti-science evangelical Cornwall Alliance against Global Warming, and Roy Spencer who is a board member?

Is Roy your messiah against the 'evil scientists' of mainstream science?

http://www.cornwallalliance.org/2009/05/01/evangelical-declaration-on-global-warming/


Attacking the people rather than the argument presented is a sure sign that you kno wthat you have lost the argument.

No, I'm attacking your 'arguments', that's not 'attacking' you personally. They are the same evidence free 'arguments' as those put forward by anti-science religious evangelists at the Cornwall Alliance, only you leave out the Jesus and "Biblically based science" bits. Dare I ask if you hold the same views on evolution as Roy Spencer too?




Edited on 01-11-2015 13:10
01-11-2015 13:35
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Tim the plumber wrote:
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote It doesn't matter who owns the site or anything else they may stand for.

In this day of misinformation, spin, and re-framing the issue for political and monetary gain, who owns the site is of key interest.


It may be of interest but it is utterly irrelivant to the valididty of the argument.

You just don't get the idea of science do you?

Science requires research and evidence. That religious website does not base it's claims on research and evidence. You just don't get the idea of science do you?

Do you agree with PRI, the website owners, that condoms and any form of contraception or birth control is 'evil' and will undermine people's belief in God and the Catholic Church? Especially in poverty stricken countries where HIV is rampant amongst the poorest least educated people?



Edited on 01-11-2015 13:38
01-11-2015 13:43
Ceist
★★★☆☆
(592)
Tim the plumber wrote:
trafn wrote:
@Tim the plumber - given what Ceist just posted, I wonder, are you pro-life?

If so, does that in any way influence your comments that you make here?


I am an atheist. I am in favor of reasonable abortion availibility. I find the system in the UK fine. I find that it is only the USA where this topic is central to public debate.

Well isn't it curious that the only place you could find to support your views on population was a religious propaganda website run by a US based religious "pro-life" activist group who are against the use of condoms or any form of contraception or birth control because of their religious beliefs. Want to try again?
Next time with a valid science-based source?

The UK? So is Nigel Lawson your 'messiah' or perhaps the potty peer Lord Christopher Monckton?
(hey you were the one to use the word 'messiah' first- just putting it back atcha)



Edited on 01-11-2015 13:52
01-11-2015 22:44
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Ceist wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote It doesn't matter who owns the site or anything else they may stand for.

In this day of misinformation, spin, and re-framing the issue for political and monetary gain, who owns the site is of key interest.


It may be of interest but it is utterly irrelivant to the valididty of the argument.

You just don't get the idea of science do you?

Science requires research and evidence. That religious website does not base it's claims on research and evidence. You just don't get the idea of science do you?

Do you agree with PRI, the website owners, that condoms and any form of contraception or birth control is 'evil' and will undermine people's belief in God and the Catholic Church? Especially in poverty stricken countries where HIV is rampant amongst the poorest least educated people?


No I do not.

I have not seen that part of the videos. Which one is it in?
01-11-2015 22:46
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Ceist wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
trafn wrote:
@Tim the plumber - given what Ceist just posted, I wonder, are you pro-life?

If so, does that in any way influence your comments that you make here?


I am an atheist. I am in favor of reasonable abortion availibility. I find the system in the UK fine. I find that it is only the USA where this topic is central to public debate.

Well isn't it curious that the only place you could find to support your views on population was a religious propaganda website run by a US based religious "pro-life" activist group who are against the use of condoms or any form of contraception or birth control because of their religious beliefs. Want to try again?
Next time with a valid science-based source?

The UK? So is Nigel Lawson your 'messiah' or perhaps the potty peer Lord Christopher Monckton?
(hey you were the one to use the word 'messiah' first- just putting it back atcha)


The world population is now estimated at 7.2 billion. But with current industrial technologies, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has estimated that the more than nine billion people expected by 2050 as the population nears its peak could be supported as long as necessary investments in infrastructure and conducive trade, anti-poverty and food security policies are in place. Who knows what will be possible with the technologies of the future? The important message from these rough numbers should be clear. There really is no such thing as a human carrying capacity. We are nothing at all like bacteria in a petri dish.


Is the Nwe York Times OK with you?
01-11-2015 22:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Ceist wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
I reject the nonscience of greenhouse gas warming the Earth. You have not provided any evidence to support it other than fudged or manufactured data.

Like I said, your statements show you are incapable of telling the difference between crackpot pseudoscience nonsense and evidence-based science. They also show evidence of conspiracy ideation where all the scientists in the world MUST have some massive evil plot to 'fudge data' because you don't like what science is clearly saying.


I'll leave you to play with cherry-picked 'numbers' in your own little infants pool thread: I'll refer to it as the The Rabbit Hole, where crackpot conspiracy theorists and lay people who have no clue about science can dive down a hole and pretend the real world doesn't exist. It's a special place where no science and no evidence is required, and where one can believe '6 impossible things before breakfast' while mathturbating with 'numbers' because they don't really even know what to do with them.


You seem to be trying to justify fudging data. You also seem to be trying to justify manufactured data.

Meh. Leave the Data Mine then. Nothing there interests you.

Zealous religious or political ideological beliefs combined with ignorance seems to lead to even more ideologically induced stupidity, extreme confirmation bias, and crackpot conspiracy ideation. For example, the conspiracy ideation that thousands of scientists all over the world are involved in a massive conspiracy to 'fudge' or manufacture data'. I find that interesting.


Then produce the data to show me your case. You say there is data that is not fudged or manufactured. Show it. Show where it comes from and how. Show me the instrumentation that was used and how it was calibrated. All the data I have shown has met this. Where is yours?
Edited on 01-11-2015 22:49
02-11-2015 00:51
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote Show me the instrumentation that was used and how it was calibrated. All the data I have shown has met this.

So you put a bunch of number in a post that you copied from somewhere else. Big deal.

How do you know they were properly calibrated. Just cause someone told you so?

Perhaps you should take the time to go to the actual place where your "data" samples were taken and check them for yourself. Given your OCD adherence to rules, I think this would be fitting.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
02-11-2015 00:53
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Tim the plumber - you wrote You just don't get the idea of science do you?


My profile - trafn

Your profile - Tim the plumber

Notice any difference?

Care to tell us what your background in "science" is?


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
02-11-2015 00:55
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the night - you wrote The supporting data is verifiable.

So verify it.

Oh wait, you can't. Sorry.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
02-11-2015 00:57
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5229)
trafn wrote:Care to tell us what your background in "science" is?


Are you basically telling us that you have no excuse for the egregious errors you make? Are you admitting that you have no excuse for your inability to discern religion from science?

If so, you have a bunch of apologies to make.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-11-2015 01:10
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - you wrote Are you basically telling us that you have...

Yet another one of your troll tactics you use - changing the subject - to help other trolls like Tim to avoid answering a simple question. So I'll ask you here as I've already asked Tim:

My profile - trafn

Your profile - IBdaMann

Notice any difference?

Care to tell us what your background is in science?


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 02-11-2015 01:12
02-11-2015 03:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote Show me the instrumentation that was used and how it was calibrated. All the data I have shown has met this.

So you put a bunch of number in a post that you copied from somewhere else. Big deal.

I have done more than this. I have also shown how they were gathered and the instrumentation used.
trafn wrote:
How do you know they were properly calibrated. Just cause someone told you so?

I don't. I accept the description of their calibration procedures they provide. I have no proof the procedures were actually followed. If you want to go down that road, however, you are basically calling the entirety of NOAA a bunch of liars. That is where I get much of my data from.

That's certainly more universal than my position, which is just the central offices creating these composite datasets that conflict with the hundreds of individual stations as liars.
trafn wrote:
Perhaps you should take the time to go to the actual place where your "data" samples were taken and check them for yourself. Given your OCD adherence to rules, I think this would be fitting.

I actually have in a few occasions. I've been to Mauna Loa. I've installed equipment for them. I've been to a few dozen NOAA weather stations also.

However, the rules do not require this. They only encourage people who wish to quote data specify source and method of data collection. That's no more than I would require of any scientist to conform to. Most scientists do.
Edited on 02-11-2015 03:49
02-11-2015 04:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
trafn wrote:
@Into the night - you wrote The supporting data is verifiable.

So verify it.

Oh wait, you can't. Sorry.


A discussion of the aging of the population across the world (as compiled from population statistics gathered by the United Nations leading up to 2014, which are in turn gathered by individual nation census programs):
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/popfacts/PopFacts_2014-4Rev1.pdf

Predictive plots including the methodology used to create the predictions are here:
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Graphs/
Note particularly the curve for China. The rest of world is predicted to rise in population, but not as fast as present rates.

The World Food Programme and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization both provide correlated information concerning the total food supply. We have plenty enough. It just doesn't get distributed to everybody evenly. Rather than killing people for this or letting them starve, perhaps methods of getting food to these people could be found?

The CIA World Factbook (which is used by the CIA to maintain up to date information for their officers and agents) contains useful current figures for populations, including age groups that are currently fertile:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html

Oops.
02-11-2015 19:47
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote I've been to Mauna Loa. I've installed equipment for them.

So let me get this straight. You mean that after you flunked out of high school, that you actually managed to pass an introduction to electronics class at some vocational training program and then were actually hired by someone? Obviously, a vacuum tube* blew out in a piece of equipment which they had sold to the lab at Mauna Loa, so they flew you, electronic boy genius, out by DC-10 to save the day. And hooray, you were actually able to find the broken vacuum tube (you know, the one with the char marks all over the inside of its glass dome) and you replaced it with a new vacuum tube (you know, the one with no char marks) and then you got back on that DC-10 and flew home to the same roach-infested, trailer park double-wide where you still live today.

So tell us, got any more CV material we can get a good chuckle over?

* - for those of you who don't remember, or never knew, what a vacuum tube is, have a look:




The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!

Edited on 02-11-2015 20:09
02-11-2015 20:25
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@Into the Night - you wrote The CIA World Factbook.....

Now there's a source of data I'd always trust - especially if I wanted to know about how to assassinate someone.

Got any more wholly unbiased data sources, boy genius?


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
02-11-2015 20:51
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5229)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote The CIA World Factbook.....

Now there's a source of data I'd always trust - especially if I wanted to know about how to assassinate someone.

Got any more wholly unbiased data sources, boy genius?


I don't think anyone cares who you trust; that's just a reflection on you. Can you find anything inaccurate in the CIA World Factbook?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-11-2015 20:53
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5229)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote I've been to Mauna Loa. I've installed equipment for them.

So let me get this straight. You mean that after you flunked out of high school, that you actually managed to pass an introduction to electronics class at some vocational training program and then were actually hired by someone? Obviously, a vacuum tube* blew out in a piece of equipment which they had sold to the lab at Mauna Loa, so they flew you, electronic boy genius, out by DC-10 to save the day. And hooray, you were actually able to find the broken vacuum tube (you know, the one with the char marks all over the inside of its glass dome) and you replaced it with a new vacuum tube (you know, the one with no char marks) and then you got back on that DC-10 and flew home to the same roach-infested, trailer park double-wide where you still live today.

So tell us, got any more CV material we can get a good chuckle over?


I guess there's little hope that you'll stop the petty insults, the personal attacks and the ongoing spamming. That's somewhat disappointing.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-11-2015 21:28
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - you wrote - I guess there's little hope that you'll stop the petty insults, the personal attacks and the ongoing spamming. That's somewhat disappointing.

Wow, you could have copied that right out of one of my posts to you from a month ago when I was trying to get you to stop being such an asshole in how you responded to everyone.

So, are you saying you're finally ready to stop being a jerk and would like to act like an adult?

If so, just say yes.


The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
02-11-2015 21:33
trafnProfile picture★★★☆☆
(779)
@IBdaMann - you wrote I don't think anyone cares who you trust; that's just a reflection on you. Can you find anything inaccurate in the CIA World Factbook?

I value people for what they do best. The CIA is the premier assassins network on Earth. You wanna kill someone, they're the guys to go to. For everything else, they're second best, at best.

You, obviously are quite the CIA admirer. Are you a DoD (Department of Defense) person by any chance?

If so, is that why you won't tell us anything about yourself?

Why not? You're not posting here on their time and computers, are you?

If so, do they know?

Oops, they know now!



The 2015 M2C2 (Global 9/11) Denialist Troll Awards

1st Place - Jep Branner - Our Stupid Administrator!
2nd Place - IBdaMann - Science IS cherry picking!
3rd Place - Into the Night - Mr. Nonsense numbers!
4th Place - Tim the plumber - The Drivel Queen!
02-11-2015 22:29
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote I've been to Mauna Loa. I've installed equipment for them.

So let me get this straight. You mean that after you flunked out of high school, that you actually managed to pass an introduction to electronics class at some vocational training program and then were actually hired by someone? Obviously, a vacuum tube* blew out in a piece of equipment which they had sold to the lab at Mauna Loa, so they flew you, electronic boy genius, out by DC-10 to save the day. And hooray, you were actually able to find the broken vacuum tube (you know, the one with the char marks all over the inside of its glass dome) and you replaced it with a new vacuum tube (you know, the one with no char marks) and then you got back on that DC-10 and flew home to the same roach-infested, trailer park double-wide where you still live today.

So tell us, got any more CV material we can get a good chuckle over?

* - for those of you who don't remember, or never knew, what a vacuum tube is, have a look:



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I haven't seen the old reliable 12ax7 in quite awhile. I built my first radio transmitter with some of those! Do you even know how to hook one these babies up?

The rest of your ad hominem ignored.
02-11-2015 22:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
trafn wrote:
@Into the Night - you wrote The CIA World Factbook.....

Now there's a source of data I'd always trust - especially if I wanted to know about how to assassinate someone.

Got any more wholly unbiased data sources, boy genius?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

The CIA Factbook doesn't TELL you how to assassinate anyone!
02-11-2015 22:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10256)
trafn wrote:
@IBdaMann - you wrote I don't think anyone cares who you trust; that's just a reflection on you. Can you find anything inaccurate in the CIA World Factbook?

I value people for what they do best. The CIA is the premier assassins network on Earth. You wanna kill someone, they're the guys to go to. For everything else, they're second best, at best.

You, obviously are quite the CIA admirer. Are you a DoD (Department of Defense) person by any chance?

If so, is that why you won't tell us anything about yourself?

Why not? You're not posting here on their time and computers, are you?

If so, do they know?

Oops, they know now!


Bulverism at it's best, trafn. The CIA World Factbook happens to be the best resource around for global populations, descriptions of nations and their cultures, national economies, etc.
02-11-2015 22:55
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5229)
trafn wrote:
@IBdaMann - you wrote I don't think anyone cares who you trust; that's just a reflection on you. Can you find anything inaccurate in the CIA World Factbook?

I value people for what they do best. The CIA is the premier assassins network on Earth. You wanna kill someone, they're the guys to go to. For everything else, they're second best, at best.

You, obviously are quite the CIA admirer. Are you a DoD (Department of Defense) person by any chance?

If so, is that why you won't tell us anything about yourself?

Why not? You're not posting here on their time and computers, are you?

If so, do they know?

Oops, they know now!


So, nothing inaccurate about the CIA World Factbook. That's what I thought.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate An open letter to all members of Climate-debate.com:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Must read letter15330-07-2019 18:32
Kenney says while he believes humans cause climate change, not all UCP members have to agree on that022-03-2019 15:52
Members1328-01-2019 19:04
An open letter to the Prime Minister on the climate crisis, from 154 scientists - August 24, 20161216-12-2017 01:03
Letter to NASA From Skeptical NASA Employees426-07-2017 02:13
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact