Climate Change caused Covid-19?

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Climate Change caused Covid-19? > Page 2

Page 2 of 4

14-04-2020 22:30
Into the Night★★★★★ (21586)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote:...it has already been answered.... You're just a liar ITN. Lie. tmiddles wrote: It's not remotely plausible you would blather on so on this board and not fit in proof I was wrong. Try English. It works better. tmiddles wrote: I have never asked GFM that question before. Lie. Yes you have. It has also been answered. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
15-04-2020 00:33
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Yes, it is rather mild....CDC reported numbers....still plenty LESS "corona deaths" than other flu deaths. This flu season has been rather mild comparatively. Just to clarify before I respond (so I know what I'm responding to) are you saying that Covid-19 is "mild" because of it's effect globally to date as compared with the global effect of all other flu illness for the entire flu season? Is the CDC global? tmiddles wrote: You're using the entire planet Earth's population to compare against and your time frame is the entire flu season? I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. tmiddles wrote: You mentioned CDC numbers and there are quite a few of those so I'd like to know your frame of reference here. I already answered this question. tmiddles wrote: Please clarify what you mean I'm not attempting to frame your argument in any way. I've already made my position as clear as I can make it. Do you not understand English? (rhetorical question) Edited on 15-04-2020 00:36
15-04-2020 01:05
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	tmiddles wrote: IBD has mentioned he considers INFOWARS to be a reputable source, link, so all bets are off with this gang. Would you mind quoting from that link what I mentioned about INFOWARS? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles 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
15-04-2020 16:31
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBD has mentioned he considers INFOWARS to be a reputable source, link, so all bets are off with this gang. Would you mind quoting from that link what I mentioned about INFOWARS? . Poor tmiddles... he knows that quoting (word for word) what you said in that link destroys his lies... However, due to all of his lying about this, he is now locked in paradox regarding this claim, and needs to clear it in order to argue rationally again.
15-04-2020 19:24
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	gfm7175 wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBD has mentioned he considers INFOWARS to be a reputable source, link, so all bets are off with this gang. Would you mind quoting from that link what I mentioned about INFOWARS? . Poor tmiddles... he knows that quoting (word for word) what you said in that link destroys his lies... However, due to all of his lying about this, he is now locked in paradox regarding this claim, and needs to clear it in order to argue rationally again. Do you mean, that he's actually argue rationally, ever?

15-04-2020 21:29
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	HarveyH55 wrote: gfm7175 wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBD has mentioned he considers INFOWARS to be a reputable source, link, so all bets are off with this gang. Would you mind quoting from that link what I mentioned about INFOWARS? . Poor tmiddles... he knows that quoting (word for word) what you said in that link destroys his lies... However, due to all of his lying about this, he is now locked in paradox regarding this claim, and needs to clear it in order to argue rationally again. Do you mean, that he's actually argue rationally, ever? Point taken.
16-04-2020 00:52
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	gfm7175 wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: gfm7175 wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBD has mentioned he considers INFOWARS to be a reputable source, link, so all bets are off with this gang. Would you mind quoting from that link what I mentioned about INFOWARS? . Poor tmiddles... he knows that quoting (word for word) what you said in that link destroys his lies... However, due to all of his lying about this, he is now locked in paradox regarding this claim, and needs to clear it in order to argue rationally again. Do you mean, that he's actually argue rationally, ever? Point taken. Did he stick you with an epee?
16-04-2020 07:22
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. You are lying. You are simply dodging the debate by not taking a position at all. AGAIN! "CDC numbers" What numbers? You call that citing a source? How about actually referencing what you are referring to. You could just say "that stuff" and be about as clear. IBdaMann wrote: Would you mind quoting from that link what I mentioned about INFOWARS? https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/wikipedia-accuracy-d6-e3013.php IBdaMann wrote: InfoWars - founded 1999 Epoch Times - founded 2000 Waxahachie Daily Light - founded 1867 (at the advent of the Communist Manifesto becoming printed in the United States) I will freely admit I had only heard of INFOWARS of the four you provided and have not looked up the other three. Did you forget you wrote that? "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN Edited on 16-04-2020 07:24
16-04-2020 16:43
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. You are lying. You are simply dodging the debate by not taking a position at all. AGAIN! The nature of philosophy is to question everything while knowing nothing. An example is can you define life? If you do then can the definition you give be defined? If the answer is yes then the initial definition you gave is a thought which can be philosophized to try and derive some meaning from. I'll give you an example. You're watching someone play basketball. And as it happens, you're watching them with gfm1775. They shoot the ball and it goes through the hoop. tmid; he made a basket gfm1775; he didn't make a basket because there is no basket tmid; when he put the ball through the hoop, it's called making a basket gfm1775; he didn't put the ball through the hoop. The ball went through the hoop on it's own. tmids; but he made a basket gfm1775; hoops are not baskets, they are hoops. or gfm1775; and what did he make this basket with? This is called going off on a tangent. As you see tmid, depending on perspective and what words/sentences mean, all comments that I made in a fictitious exchange between you and gfm1775 are all accurate statements.
16-04-2020 19:34
Into the Night★★★★★ (21586)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. You are lying. You are simply dodging the debate by not taking a position at all. AGAIN! Lie. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: "CDC numbers" What numbers? You call that citing a source? How about actually referencing what you are referring to. You could just say "that stuff" and be about as clear. ...deleted unrelated material... RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
16-04-2020 19:51
Into the Night★★★★★ (21586)	James___ wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. You are lying. You are simply dodging the debate by not taking a position at all. AGAIN! The nature of philosophy is to question everything while knowing nothing. An example is can you define life? If you do then can the definition you give be defined? If the answer is yes then the initial definition you gave is a thought which can be philosophized to try and derive some meaning from. I'll give you an example. You're watching someone play basketball. And as it happens, you're watching them with gfm1775. They shoot the ball and it goes through the hoop. tmid; he made a basket gfm1775; he didn't make a basket because there is no basket tmid; when he put the ball through the hoop, it's called making a basket gfm1775; he didn't put the ball through the hoop. The ball went through the hoop on it's own. tmids; but he made a basket gfm1775; hoops are not baskets, they are hoops. or gfm1775; and what did he make this basket with? This is called going off on a tangent. As you see tmid, depending on perspective and what words/sentences mean, all comments that I made in a fictitious exchange between you and gfm1775 are all accurate statements. Not the nature of philosophy. Philosophy is about making reasoned arguments. These arguments have predicates. They are the knowledge that is assumed as facts. If the predicates themselves become arguments, then the predicates of those arguments are used. The only real rule of philosophy is that you must present your own arguments and their reasoning You cannot use anyone else's argument as your own. One definition of life, for example, is a complex organic structure that is self replicating. This includes cells, fungi, plants, animals, etc. It excludes viruses, since they cannot self replicate. It has been theorized that life need not be organic, in that a similar element, silicon can be used instead of carbon. It turns out that silicon is too heavy to form the complex structures that carbon can...structures that are necessary for life. It can also be theorized that a life might take the form of a machine which is self replicating. Such machines are, however, made up of materials that are smelted and alloyed from natural materials. While no such machines have been built, it theoretically is possible. In that case, would one call it life since we built the initial machine? This problem extends to creating life in the lab. If we manage to do so, even using organic chemistry to do it, is it actually life? Would this prove that life originated here on Earth through some random unspecified events, or would it prove that life was created by some form of intelligence (such as a god or an alien). Then what about 'life' that replicates very slowly; so slowly we do not recognize it as life. The opposite presents problems as well. If life replicates quickly, so quickly that the lifespan is too fast for us to see, is it life? What we call 'life' is largely a matter of convenience. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 16-04-2020 19:54
16-04-2020 20:03
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	Into the Night wrote: James___ wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. You are lying. You are simply dodging the debate by not taking a position at all. AGAIN! The nature of philosophy is to question everything while knowing nothing. An example is can you define life? If you do then can the definition you give be defined? If the answer is yes then the initial definition you gave is a thought which can be philosophized to try and derive some meaning from. I'll give you an example. You're watching someone play basketball. And as it happens, you're watching them with gfm1775. They shoot the ball and it goes through the hoop. tmid; he made a basket gfm1775; he didn't make a basket because there is no basket tmid; when he put the ball through the hoop, it's called making a basket gfm1775; he didn't put the ball through the hoop. The ball went through the hoop on it's own. tmids; but he made a basket gfm1775; hoops are not baskets, they are hoops. or gfm1775; and what did he make this basket with? This is called going off on a tangent. As you see tmid, depending on perspective and what words/sentences mean, all comments that I made in a fictitious exchange between you and gfm1775 are all accurate statements. Not the nature of philosophy. Philosophy is about making reasoned arguments. These arguments have predicates. They are the knowledge that is assumed as facts. If the predicates themselves become arguments, then the predicates of those arguments are used. The only real rule of philosophy is that you must present your own arguments and their reasoning You cannot use anyone else's argument as your own. One definition of life, for example, is a complex organic structure that is self replicating. This includes cells, fungi, plants, animals, etc. It excludes viruses, since they cannot self replicate. It has been theorized that life need not be organic, in that a similar element, silicon can be used instead of carbon. It turns out that silicon is too heavy to form the complex structures that carbon can...structures that are necessary for life. It can also be theorized that a life might take the form of a machine which is self replicating. Such machines are, however, made up of materials that are smelted and alloyed from natural materials. While no such machines have been built, it theoretically is possible. In that case, would one call it life since we built the initial machine? This problem extends to creating life in the lab. If we manage to do so, even using organic chemistry to do it, is it actually life? Would this prove that life originated here on Earth through some random unspecified events, or would it prove that life was created by some form of intelligence (such as a god or an alien). Then what about 'life' that replicates very slowly; so slowly we do not recognize it as life. The opposite presents problems as well. If life replicates quickly, so quickly that the lifespan is too fast for us to see, is it life? What we call 'life' is largely a matter of convenience. They are the knowledge that is assumed as facts. Word salad. Assumptions are falsifiable. It excludes viruses, since they cannot self replicate. That is a condition. Is life conditional? An example is that because what we call people are composed of elements which cannot self replicate. Then according to your philosophy life does not exist.
17-04-2020 00:18
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. Yes, I did. tmiddles wrote: You are lying. No, YOU are. Inversion Fallacy. tmiddles wrote: You are simply dodging the debate by not taking a position at all. AGAIN! No, you are simply pulling a tmiddles and acting as if people have not answered your questions even though they already directly answered them. tmiddles wrote: "CDC numbers" That's what I said. tmiddles wrote: What numbers? Already answered. tmiddles wrote: You call that citing a source? Yes. tmiddles wrote: How about actually referencing what you are referring to. Already did. tmiddles wrote: You could just say "that stuff" and be about as clear. Already clearly referenced them. tmiddles wrote: [quote]IBdaMann wrote: Would you mind quoting from that link what I mentioned about INFOWARS? https://www.climate-debate.com/forum/wikipedia-accuracy-d6-e3013.php IBdaMann wrote: InfoWars - founded 1999 Epoch Times - founded 2000 Waxahachie Daily Light - founded 1867 (at the advent of the Communist Manifesto becoming printed in the United States) Care to quote for us all the question that you asked him just before he gave that response to you? tmiddles wrote: I will freely admit I had only heard of INFOWARS of the four you provided and have not looked up the other three. He only provided three examples, not four. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, eh? tmiddles wrote: Did you forget you wrote that? Did you forget the specific question that you asked him, which prompted that particular response of his?
17-04-2020 06:58
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. Yes, I did. Sums it up.
17-04-2020 13:32
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: InfoWars - founded 1999 Epoch Times - founded 2000 Waxahachie Daily Light - founded 1867 (at the advent of the Communist Manifesto becoming printed in the United States) I will freely admit I had only heard of INFOWARS of the four you provided and have not looked up the other three. Did you forget you wrote that? I remember writing that. When did I write that any were credible? When did I write that any were not credible? When did I write anything other than that they were conservative startups spawned amidst a world of overwhelmingly leftist media? Hello? [I'd ask why you are so brazenly misrepresenting my position but then again, you are an incorrigible liar who has nothing but misrepresentations. Things must be slow for you over at Reuters] . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles 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

17-04-2020 15:00
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: ...I'd ask why you are so brazenly misrepresenting my position but .... what I represented was a link to your post and the entirely true representation that you have presented INFOWARS ad an alternative to Wkipedia. It is still true now. I know you love to play games and be vague but you posted that.
17-04-2020 17:44
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: ...I'd ask why you are so brazenly misrepresenting my position but .... what I represented was a link to your post and the entirely true representation that you have presented INFOWARS ad an alternative to Wkipedia. It is still true now. I know you love to play games and be vague but you posted that. Mostly, I see you as playing the games on this forum, a troll. You create problems, then you chase people through every active thread, pursuing the problems you created. Either that, or your reading comprehension skill are about as sharp, as middle-school student, and you are having more frequent 'Biden-moments', not the groping kind either...
17-04-2020 19:19
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: I've already answered this question myself. Read my prior response again. No you didn't. Yes, I did. Sums it up. And for all of your accusing others of "ignoring your questions", you've just ignored mine. I ask again... Care to quote for us all the question that you asked him (IBDaMann) just before he gave that response to you?
17-04-2020 19:25
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: InfoWars - founded 1999 Epoch Times - founded 2000 Waxahachie Daily Light - founded 1867 (at the advent of the Communist Manifesto becoming printed in the United States) I will freely admit I had only heard of INFOWARS of the four you provided and have not looked up the other three. Did you forget you wrote that? I remember writing that. When did I write that any were credible? When did I write that any were not credible? When did I write anything other than that they were conservative startups spawned amidst a world of overwhelmingly leftist media? Hello? [I'd ask why you are so brazenly misrepresenting my position but then again, you are an incorrigible liar who has nothing but misrepresentations. Things must be slow for you over at Reuters] . He seems to be ignoring your questions as well. Obviously, he realizes that "the jig is up" if he were to start being honest...
17-04-2020 19:27
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: ...I'd ask why you are so brazenly misrepresenting my position but .... what I represented was a link to your post and the entirely true representation that you have presented INFOWARS ad an alternative to Wkipedia. It is still true now. I know you love to play games and be vague but you posted that. No, you argued yourself into a paradox due to your continued lying about the matter. You have yet to clear your paradox. You have yet to be honest about what was said.
18-04-2020 02:01
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote:...you've just ignored mine....Care to quote... That wasn't a question it was an instruction. I don't do easter egg hunts or take instruction here GFM. You'll need to make your own points. So the answer is NO I will not quote anything you could easily quote yourself. gfm7175 wrote:...argued yourself into a paradox... No clue what that even means. I'll say again: what I represented was a link to IBD's post and the entirely true representation that IBD has presented INFOWARS ad an alternative to Wikipedia. It is still true now. Question for you GFM. Why are we talking about INFOWARS on the board at all? Did I bring it up or was it IBD? https://www.climate-debate.com/find.php?stype=f&q=infowars Do you have any opinion on INFOWARS? I consider it to be total crap, and dangerous too. Why anyone would mention it much less classify it as news, it beyond my comprehension. Edited on 18-04-2020 02:04
18-04-2020 02:23
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	This is interesting. According to infowars, on April 14 the coronavirus became the 2nd leading cause of death in the US. They also said that the number of deaths per day was 24 times higher than the flu. And this is with drastic steps having been taken to try and reduce the risk of it spreading. Just food for thought. https://www.infowars.com/covid-19-has-become-the-second-leading-cause-of-death-in-the-united-states/
18-04-2020 18:34
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	James___ wrote: This is interesting. According to infowars, on April 14 the coronavirus became the 2nd leading cause of death in the US. They also said that the number of deaths per day was 24 times higher than the flu. And this is with drastic steps having been taken to try and reduce the risk of it spreading. Just food for thought. https://www.infowars.com/covid-19-has-become-the-second-leading-cause-of-death-in-the-united-states/ Fear-mongering, like most every media outlet... Misery and panic, increases ratings/profits...
19-04-2020 04:59
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: James___ wrote: This is interesting. According to infowars, on April 14 the coronavirus became the 2nd leading cause of death in the US. They also said that the number of deaths per day was 24 times higher than the flu. And this is with drastic steps having been taken to try and reduce the risk of it spreading. Just food for thought. https://www.infowars.com/covid-19-has-become-the-second-leading-cause-of-death-in-the-united-states/ Fear-mongering, like most every media outlet... Misery and panic, increases ratings/profits... They support people like you. I was trying to do you a good turn
19-04-2020 05:03
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	James___ wrote:I was trying to do you a good turn Citing INFOWARS here is just purely destructive James.
19-04-2020 06:34
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Alex Jones - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › Alex_Jones Jones' website, InfoWars, is derived from conspiracy theories and fake news, as are websites NewsWars and PrisonPlanet. Jones began his broadcasting career ... This is the first thing that came up when I typed in Infowars.I watched the Australian bushfire link and agreed with it.Its all about controlled burning before the fire season however Green protestors claimed the burn back was killing baby birds and only a small area was cleared.Guess where the fires started??Bet they dont do that next year!!To somehow claim .8 degree global warming caused this event is outrageous.
19-04-2020 06:45
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	duncan61 wrote: Alex Jones - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › Alex_Jones Jones' website, InfoWars, is derived from conspiracy theories and fake news, as are websites NewsWars and PrisonPlanet. Jones began his broadcasting career ... Thank you for bringing this to my attention. This is the opening to the Wikipedia entry: InfoWars is a far-right American conspiracy theory and fake news website owned by Alex Jones. This is not accurate and is certainly is not neutral, which pits it against Wikipedia's stated requirements for neutrality and accuracy. Wikipedia is summarily dismissed. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles 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
19-04-2020 06:47
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	tmiddles wrote: James___ wrote:I was trying to do you a good turn Citing INFOWARS here is just purely destructive James. In what way do you mean? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles 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
19-04-2020 06:57
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I am pleased to of found Info wars and am enjoying the show.I am staying home today so will be watching a fair amount.
19-04-2020 07:44
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	duncan61 wrote: I am pleased to of found Info wars ... Thank IBD he has brought it to the board. IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: James___ wrote:I was trying to do you a good turn Citing INFOWARS here is just purely destructive James. In what way do you mean? In what "way" ? INFOWARS is a site that traffics in incediary nonsense. It does two very destructive things you are also guilty of IBD: 1 - disseminates false information which is known to be false even by the presenter, be it you, Jones ect. 2 - pushes a cult like indoctrinated world view that makes critical analysis impossible for its members. As in all data is bogus, nothing can be known, a vast and all powerful conspiracy is behind anything that contradicts you/Alex The goal being not knowledge or even a political agenda but simply to win at the expense of a defeated foe. Not unlike a virus. IBdaMann wrote: duncan61 wrote: Alex Jones - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › InfoWars is a far-right American conspiracy theory and fake news website owned by Alex Jones. This is not accurate . What should it say and would be accurate? Edited on 19-04-2020 07:51

19-04-2020 08:39
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I need to have access to all information available to learn as much as I possibly can.I have the ability to decide what is real and what is exaggerated.I have just waded through the IPCC SR6 report and the first problem I have is that the board select 80 scientists from 88 countries.Are you for REAL so they hand pick who they need to support there nonsense.There are to many claims that start with IS LIKELY and POSSIBLY.There is never an out and out statement declaring it will happen it is all put forward as a potential maybe. I got what IBD meant.Do you consider you may be the devils advocate on this site which is a good thing as it is a debating site you may have just dropped the ball a bit by attacking the source like the pro AGW people claim us deniers do.Ooooppps
19-04-2020 08:47
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	duncan61 wrote:...they hand pick who they need to support there nonsense.... Your statement implies you believe there are deserters. Assuming the IPCC didn't have them killed wouldn't their well qualified dissent be easily found? duncan61 wrote:There are to many claims that start with IS LIKELY and POSSIBLY. Why do you have a problem with an admitted lack of certainty? We are talking about predictions of very complex systems right? I don't understand your having a problem with that honest language. It WOULD make sense to call BS if they were over confident. Just weird to have the counter argument "my opponent is not confident enough saying the things I disagree with". duncan61 wrote:Do you consider you may be the devils advocate on this site which is a good thing as it is a debating site you may have just dropped the ball a bit by attacking the source like the pro AGW people claim us deniers do.Ooooppps What? You is the "you" in that sentence? Me or IBD? What is the source? Also as you can see ITN/IBD refuse to debate me at this point. Too much losing for their taste. Edited on 19-04-2020 08:49
19-04-2020 19:07
spot ★★★★☆ (1323)	I just learnt I lost a colleague to this. He was a great guy and true professional when he was on shift you know things would be done right. I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this.
19-04-2020 21:34
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	spot wrote:I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this. Because you cling to the hope that we won't see through your completely transparent dishonesty. ... but it's great to have you pop in again. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles 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
19-04-2020 21:44
spot ★★★★☆ (1323)	IBdaMann wrote: spot wrote:I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this. Because you cling to the hope that we won't see through your completely transparent dishonesty. ... but it's great to have you pop in again. . You really are vile. IBdaMann wrote: "Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody. Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T.
19-04-2020 22:59
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	spot wrote: IBdaMann wrote: spot wrote:I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this. Because you cling to the hope that we won't see through your completely transparent dishonesty. ... but it's great to have you pop in again. You really are vile. Of course I am. I rebuffed your requests for me to join your warmizombie church and you have never forgiven me. ... but I have forgiven you ... and I feel pity for you and your condition ... or maybe there were some bad beans in my burrito ... and you are always welcome to come over the science side of the fence, to the honesty side of the fence, to the "add value to society" side of the fence. To that end, it is always good to see you return to this site and express interest in coming over to our side of the fence. Would you perchance like to discuss thermodynamics or Stefan-Boltzmann? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles 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
20-04-2020 00:43
spot ★★★★☆ (1323)	IBdaMann wrote: spot wrote: IBdaMann wrote: spot wrote:I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this. Because you cling to the hope that we won't see through your completely transparent dishonesty. ... but it's great to have you pop in again. You really are vile. Of course I am. I rebuffed your requests for me to join your warmizombie church and you have never forgiven me. ... but I have forgiven you ... and I feel pity for you and your condition ... or maybe there were some bad beans in my burrito ... and you are always welcome to come over the science side of the fence, to the honesty side of the fence, to the "add value to society" side of the fence. To that end, it is always good to see you return to this site and express interest in coming over to our side of the fence. Would you perchance like to discuss thermodynamics or Stefan-Boltzmann? . Someone I know is dead I'm not in the mood for playing whatever game you want to play. IBdaMann wrote: "Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody. Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T. Edited on 20-04-2020 00:48
20-04-2020 02:26
Into the Night★★★★★ (21586)	spot wrote: IBdaMann wrote: spot wrote: IBdaMann wrote: spot wrote:I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this. Because you cling to the hope that we won't see through your completely transparent dishonesty. ... but it's great to have you pop in again. You really are vile. Of course I am. I rebuffed your requests for me to join your warmizombie church and you have never forgiven me. ... but I have forgiven you ... and I feel pity for you and your condition ... or maybe there were some bad beans in my burrito ... and you are always welcome to come over the science side of the fence, to the honesty side of the fence, to the "add value to society" side of the fence. To that end, it is always good to see you return to this site and express interest in coming over to our side of the fence. Would you perchance like to discuss thermodynamics or Stefan-Boltzmann? . Someone I know is dead I'm not in the mood for playing whatever game you want to play. So someone you know that is dead is justification for your bulverism??? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-04-2020 10:05
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	spot wrote: I just learnt I lost a colleague to this. He was a great guy and true professional when he was on shift you know things would be done right. I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this. That sucks spot sorry to hear that. Glad you shared (I don't think the reactions from some folks here are too surprising). I don't know anyone yet who has had a deadly serious case but some who have gotten very sick. I know several people who are terrified as they have health conditions that would make it likely a life threatening illness: one with severe life long asthma and two cancer patients. Sounds like we lost someone really making a contribution to society too. It's not all 90 year olds.
20-04-2020 12:36
spot ★★★★☆ (1323)	tmiddles wrote: spot wrote: I just learnt I lost a colleague to this. He was a great guy and true professional when he was on shift you know things would be done right. I don't know why I'm wasting my time telling you all this. That sucks spot sorry to hear that. Glad you shared (I don't think the reactions from some folks here are too surprising). I don't know anyone yet who has had a deadly serious case but some who have gotten very sick. I know several people who are terrified as they have health conditions that would make it likely a life threatening illness: one with severe life long asthma and two cancer patients. Sounds like we lost someone really making a contribution to society too. It's not all 90 year olds. Thanks alot, it makes it hit home of course it ws a mistake sharing that here I should have known what the reaction would be but if anyone wants to act like a human being I appreciate it. IBdaMann wrote: "Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody. Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T.

Page 2 of 4

Join the debate Climate Change caused Covid-19?:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Actor Jamie Foxx is now blind and paralyzed due to the covid vaccine that he was forced to take	10	11-02-2024 01:28
BREAKING NEWS Vaccinated Jill Xiden gets covid for second time	0	05-09-2023 05:37
Bodybuilder Gustavo Badel dead of covid vaccine stroke. Ans the real carnage begins	30	17-07-2023 15:41
Jamie Foxx seen sitting on a boat, because he cannot stand since his covid 19 vaccination	28	15-07-2023 20:46
Jamie Foxx blind and paralyzed due to covid vaccine for Netflix	39	12-07-2023 20:11