Remember me
▼ Content

CO2 Lags About 2,000 Years Behind on Temperature Changes



Page 3 of 3<123
04-09-2016 00:06
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
Leafsdude wrote:
Then what was the "gibber-babble" you were referring to, and what made it so?


From what I gather, he was referring to your use of feedback loops in the atmosphere.


The Parrot Killer
04-09-2016 08:53
Leafsdude
★☆☆☆☆
(141)
Is ITN correct, IBDM?

If so, could you explain why feedback loops "in the atmosphere" is "gibber-babble"?
Edited on 04-09-2016 08:54
04-09-2016 10:50
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(166)
Leafsdude wrote:
Is ITN correct, IBDM?

If so, could you explain why feedback loops "in the atmosphere" is "gibber-babble"?


He's long on putdowns, short on explanations.
04-09-2016 18:45
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Leafsdude wrote:
Is ITN correct, IBDM?

If so, could you explain why feedback loops "in the atmosphere" is "gibber-babble"?

You could start by pointing to the science to which you believe you are referring.

By the way, DRKTS is a professional huckster whose career investment is in Global Warming. When people talk about dishonest people who have vested interests in promoting Global Warming, he's an excellent example.

Please notice that he will NOT discuss physics with someone who sees through his crap. You won't be seeing him trying to explain any "feedback" miracles or "forcings."

Do you know what religious dogma is?

"Forcings" and "Feedbacks" as they pertain to the "Climate" faiths, are pure religious dogma. You won't find them in physics.


@ DRKTS, just for grins, why don't you give us a primer on the physics of "Forcings"? I'm sure Leafsdude would appreciate it immensely. I know I would enjoy it.

Thanks in advance! 8^>


.


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
04-09-2016 19:50
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(166)
IBdaMann wrote:
By the way, DRKTS is a professional huckster whose career investment is in Global Warming. When people talk about dishonest people who have vested interests in promoting Global Warming, he's an excellent example.


A complete and utter lie based on zero evidence. You make the claim, the burden of proof is on you.


Please notice that he will NOT discuss physics with someone who sees through his crap. You won't be seeing him trying to explain any "feedback" miracles or "forcings."


Many of my YT videos discuss these subjects. Go look 'em up.

Do you know what religious dogma is?

"Forcings" and "Feedbacks" as they pertain to the "Climate" faiths, are pure religious dogma. You won't find them in physics.



@ DRKTS, just for grins, why don't you give us a primer on the physics of "Forcings"? I'm sure Leafsdude would appreciate it immensely. I know I would enjoy it.

Thanks in advance! 8^>


I don't need to, it has already been done http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/

All in glorious physics, with equations, references, etc.

Too much physics so perhaps MIT can make it simpler for you ...

http://news.mit.edu/2010/explained-radforce-0309

Yeah, perhaps that is still too tough for you .... let's try one for 5th graders

http://www.explainthatstuff.com/globalwarmingforkids.html

When you can show me that you have looked and understood those simple explanations, I'll supply you with similar references to explain feedbacks. I am not holding my breath.
04-09-2016 22:55
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
DRKTS wrote:A complete and utter lie based on zero evidence. You make the claim, the burden of proof is on you.

You helped illuminate your snake oil nature. It would not have been as effective without your help.

You invited the forum to view your videos.

Into the Night and I took the time to point out the errors, of which there were many, their location in the video and how to correct them.

Did we get a "thank you"? Nope.

Did we get a bunch of angry insults? You betcha.

It quickly became clear that your sole intent is to preach violations of physics as though they are science without advising your audience that it's all just your WACKY religious dogma.

If you want to revisit our critiques and actually address them then great, we're still waiting. Until then, you don't merit any more of my time.

H - * - * - U - * - * - C - * - * - K - * - * - S - * - * - T - * - * - E - * - * - R


.


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
Edited on 04-09-2016 22:56
04-09-2016 23:03
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
DRKTS wrote:Many of my YT videos discuss these subjects. Go look 'em up.

Your videos do not "discuss" anything; they preach sermons.

One cannot discuss with your videos. One cannot discuss with you.

DRKTS wrote: I don't need to, it has already been done

Thank you for confirming that you won't discuss the "science" you present.


.


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
05-09-2016 04:56
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(166)
IBdaMann wrote:
You helped illuminate your snake oil nature. It would not have been as effective without your help.

You invited the forum to view your videos.

Into the Night and I took the time to point out the errors, of which there were many, their location in the video and how to correct them.

.


I do not recall a single comment on any of my videos where anyone pointed out a valid scientific error.

Which video? When? What was your YT ID so I can check what you wrote?

As usual you miss out any salient details that might enable someone to check what you say is true. I therefore assume it is not true.

You guys are just pathological liars.
05-09-2016 05:55
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
DRKTS wrote:I do not recall a single comment on any of my videos where anyone pointed out a valid scientific error.

Then your recollection sucks.

DRKTS wrote:Which video? When? What was your YT ID so I can check what you wrote?

One example: http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/its-the-sun-stupid-d6-e1065.php#post_8369

.


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
Edited on 05-09-2016 05:55
05-09-2016 06:01
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
DRKTS wrote:I do not recall a single comment on any of my videos where anyone pointed out a valid scientific error.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8624

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8605


.


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
05-09-2016 12:33
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(166)
IBdaMann wrote:
DRKTS wrote:I do not recall a single comment on any of my videos where anyone pointed out a valid scientific error.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8624

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8605


.


You make my point for me, all you have there is just more put downs based on nothing, no evidence, do data, no equations, no logic, no experiments or models to prove your case ... nothing.

You did not even dare to make comments on the videos themselves on YT. Instead you had to put them here. You know full well that if you had commented on my videos on YT where there is a true mixed audience your arguments would have been torn to shreds by others as well as myself.

Its the usual garbage you preach - all science is wrong, therefore there is no case. Then you appeal to your "science" but can never say what that science is. A whole lot of denial, false labelling, and emotive language with zero substance.

It is just plain disingenuous. You are fooling nobody but yourselves. You are convincing nobody but yourselves.

Your side has lost and it is showing increasingly in the polls:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190010/concern-global-warming-eight-year-high.aspx

The precise reason is the sort of approach you take. Bluster without substance.
05-09-2016 15:47
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
WARNING: Huckster Alert!

DRKTS wrote:IYou make my point for me, all you have there is just more put downs based on nothing, no evidence, do data, no equations, no logic, no experiments or models to prove your case ... nothing.

You did not even dare to make comments on the videos themselves on YT. Instead you had to put them here. You know full well that if you had commented on my videos on YT where there is a true mixed audience your arguments would have been torn to shreds by others as well as myself.

Its the usual garbage you preach - all science is wrong, therefore there is no case. Then you appeal to your "science" but can never say what that science is. A whole lot of denial, false labelling, and emotive language with zero substance.

It is just plain disingenuous. You are fooling nobody but yourselves. You are convincing nobody but yourselves.

Your side has lost and it is showing increasingly in the polls:


Truly the stuff of a professional charlatan.





.


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
05-09-2016 23:29
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
DRKTS wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
DRKTS wrote:I do not recall a single comment on any of my videos where anyone pointed out a valid scientific error.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8624

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8605


.


You make my point for me, all you have there is just more put downs based on nothing, no evidence, do data, no equations, no logic, no experiments or models to prove your case ... nothing.

Obviously you don't know what:

'data' is. Data is a collection of numbers from some kind of measurement. Something YOU DON'T HAVE. It is not possible to measure or calculate a global temperature.

an 'equation' is. ALL of the comments made above refer back to equations you can go look up at any time and they haven't changed. They're free for public viewing, too!

'logic' is. You have no understanding of formal or informal logic. Your videos are filled with fallacies. We have both described what they are.

'experiments' are, which are observations arranged over simplified systems such as the controlled environment being one such simplified system, and are solely used to try to prove a theory false. Your experiments do not qualify because they try to prove nothing false. They are magic tricks used to try to prove something true. You have one difference between you and a stage magician; you suck at it.

'models' are. Everyone has models. You have them, I have them, IBDaMann has them. No model is correct, but there are good models and bad models. To deny a model exists is to deny the entirety of language and thought and all it touches.


DRKTS wrote:
You did not even dare to make comments on the videos themselves on YT. Instead you had to put them here. You know full well that if you had commented on my videos on YT where there is a true mixed audience your arguments would have been torn to shreds by others as well as myself.

Both of these quotes are fairly long, since we detailed scene by scene why your videos suck. He was only being courteous. Anyone interested can easily look them up using the convenient link provided.

Demanding bulk for bulk's sake is rather a silly argument.

DRKTS wrote:
Its the usual garbage you preach - all science is wrong,
All science is...wrong???

WTF?? Do you even know what science IS? Science has no right or wrong. It is simply science.


DRKTS wrote:
therefore there is no case.
If you deny science, then what case do your videos claim??
DRKTS wrote:
Then you appeal to your "science" but can never say what that science is.
Bad recollection again. You DO seem to have a poor memory. He and I have both described what science is many times.

DRKTS wrote:
A whole lot of denial, false labelling, and emotive language with zero substance.
This seems to be YOUR pattern. It is also the pattern in your videos.

DRKTS wrote:
It is just plain disingenuous. You are fooling nobody but yourselves. You are convincing nobody but yourselves.

Your side has lost and it is showing increasingly in the polls:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190010/concern-global-warming-eight-year-high.aspx

The precise reason is the sort of approach you take. Bluster without substance.

Polls are not science, twit. Consensus has no place in science at all.

Personally, I think IBDaMann's portrayal of you as a snake oil salesman is quite accurate.


The Parrot Killer
06-09-2016 03:17
DRKTS
★★☆☆☆
(166)
Into the Night wrote:
DRKTS wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
DRKTS wrote:I do not recall a single comment on any of my videos where anyone pointed out a valid scientific error.


http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8624

http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/but-global-warming-is-good-for-us-isnt-it-d6-e1074.php#post_8605


.


You make my point for me, all you have there is just more put downs based on nothing, no evidence, do data, no equations, no logic, no experiments or models to prove your case ... nothing.

Obviously you don't know what:

'data' is. Data is a collection of numbers from some kind of measurement. Something YOU DON'T HAVE. It is not possible to measure or calculate a global temperature.

an 'equation' is. ALL of the comments made above refer back to equations you can go look up at any time and they haven't changed. They're free for public viewing, too!

'logic' is. You have no understanding of formal or informal logic. Your videos are filled with fallacies. We have both described what they are.

'experiments' are, which are observations arranged over simplified systems such as the controlled environment being one such simplified system, and are solely used to try to prove a theory false. Your experiments do not qualify because they try to prove nothing false. They are magic tricks used to try to prove something true. You have one difference between you and a stage magician; you suck at it.

'models' are. Everyone has models. You have them, I have them, IBDaMann has them. No model is correct, but there are good models and bad models. To deny a model exists is to deny the entirety of language and thought and all it touches.


DRKTS wrote:
You did not even dare to make comments on the videos themselves on YT. Instead you had to put them here. You know full well that if you had commented on my videos on YT where there is a true mixed audience your arguments would have been torn to shreds by others as well as myself.

Both of these quotes are fairly long, since we detailed scene by scene why your videos suck. He was only being courteous. Anyone interested can easily look them up using the convenient link provided.

Demanding bulk for bulk's sake is rather a silly argument.

DRKTS wrote:
Its the usual garbage you preach - all science is wrong,
All science is...wrong???

WTF?? Do you even know what science IS? Science has no right or wrong. It is simply science.


DRKTS wrote:
therefore there is no case.
If you deny science, then what case do your videos claim??
DRKTS wrote:
Then you appeal to your "science" but can never say what that science is.
Bad recollection again. You DO seem to have a poor memory. He and I have both described what science is many times.

DRKTS wrote:
A whole lot of denial, false labelling, and emotive language with zero substance.
This seems to be YOUR pattern. It is also the pattern in your videos.

DRKTS wrote:
It is just plain disingenuous. You are fooling nobody but yourselves. You are convincing nobody but yourselves.

Your side has lost and it is showing increasingly in the polls:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/190010/concern-global-warming-eight-year-high.aspx

The precise reason is the sort of approach you take. Bluster without substance.

Polls are not science, twit. Consensus has no place in science at all.

Personally, I think IBDaMann's portrayal of you as a snake oil salesman is quite accurate.


More bluster without substance.
06-09-2016 03:44
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1673)
DRKTS wrote:
More bluster without substance.

Oh, I dunno. I thought

To deny a model exists is to deny the entirety of language and thought and all it touches.

was rather poetic. Haven't the faintest what it means, mind. Bluster? No. Without substance? 'fraid so.
06-09-2016 15:02
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
DRKTS wrote:More bluster without substance.

In the US, the traditional line for hucksters is "Go away, kid, you bother me."

I'm jussayn in case you want to communicate your message more effectively to the American crowd, because we have many gullible people who will line up for what you're peddling.




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
06-09-2016 21:30
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
If climate deniers also deny crustal slips, they are in fact standing with empty hands.

There, I've said it.

Higher eccentric orbits ⇒ larger oscillating (tidal) forces ⇒ crustal slips ⇒ changing latitudes ⇒ wrong interpretation of ice cores

Or were it the ancient pirates who secretly pulled on the crust?
06-09-2016 21:39
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Buildreps wrote:If climate deniers also deny crustal slips, they are in fact standing with empty hands.

You bring up a great point. "Climate deniers."

What's the officially sanctioned church definition?



.


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
06-09-2016 21:47
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Buildreps wrote:
If climate deniers also deny crustal slips, they are in fact standing with empty hands.

There, I've said it.

Higher eccentric orbits ⇒ larger oscillating (tidal) forces ⇒ crustal slips ⇒ changing latitudes ⇒ wrong interpretation of ice cores

Or were it the ancient pirates who secretly pulled on the crust?


I have not been keeping up with this thread. I generally don't read them when Ibeda denier is involved heavily.

Can you start a new thread about crustal slips please. I have not come across this idea in climate science.
06-09-2016 22:06
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Buildreps wrote:
If climate deniers also deny crustal slips, they are in fact standing with empty hands.

There, I've said it.

Higher eccentric orbits ⇒ larger oscillating (tidal) forces ⇒ crustal slips ⇒ changing latitudes ⇒ wrong interpretation of ice cores

Or were it the ancient pirates who secretly pulled on the crust?


I have not been keeping up with this thread. I generally don't read them when Ibeda denier is involved heavily.

Can you start a new thread about crustal slips please. I have not come across this idea in climate science.


No, I won't start it again. It is somewhere in the dungeons of this website, ridiculed by the most avid users of this site.
06-09-2016 22:15
spot
★★★★☆
(1216)
Dont worry you can find it again http://www.climate-debate.com/forum/the-cause-of-ice-ages-crustal-displacements-d6-e1143.php#post_9813

One thing I will say is that what ever it is it's obvously had a lot of time spent on it

A quote from it
About 50% of the 300 ancient structures that were involved in this research are crossing four sections of together just 17° along the proposed intersection line. The mathematical implication of this is impressive, since the structures are randomly spread around the world. Mathematicians understand the consequences of this, especially when the details will be published: the probability that this is coincidence is 1 to 95,000.


If Mathematicians say that it must be true.
07-09-2016 00:09
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
spot wrote:
One thing I will say is that what ever it is it's obvously had a lot of time spent on it


More than one thousand hours... Maybe even two thousand. I kept no record.

spot wrote:
If Mathematicians say that it must be true.


Do you mean that sarcastic?
Edited on 07-09-2016 00:09
07-09-2016 04:15
Leafsdude
★☆☆☆☆
(141)
"Forcings" and "Feedbacks" as they pertain to the "Climate" faiths, are pure religious dogma. You won't find them in physics.


You agree that forcings and feedbacks do occur, though, correct? Yet you disagree that they can happen in the atmosphere? What makes the atmosphere special? Or is this a fallacious special pleading?


The rest of the context from IBdaMann's quote:

"Raw data does not show accurate trends. As many deniers like to state, using raw data would not account for effects like the Urban Heat Island effect or El Nino's and La Nina's (though the latter can and does show up even when the data is modified) as well as basic noise from normal, natural changes in yearly weather patterns. This is why climatologists use anomalous temperature events rather than actual temperatures, as they've proven to be more accurate at showing trends."
07-09-2016 11:44
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1295)
Buildreps wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Buildreps wrote:
If climate deniers also deny crustal slips, they are in fact standing with empty hands.

There, I've said it.

Higher eccentric orbits ⇒ larger oscillating (tidal) forces ⇒ crustal slips ⇒ changing latitudes ⇒ wrong interpretation of ice cores

Or were it the ancient pirates who secretly pulled on the crust?


I have not been keeping up with this thread. I generally don't read them when Ibeda denier is involved heavily.

Can you start a new thread about crustal slips please. I have not come across this idea in climate science.


No, I won't start it again. It is somewhere in the dungeons of this website, ridiculed by the most avid users of this site.


OK, I have had a look and it's utter drivel.

Clearly you have no science understanding at all.

We can date the building of the pyrimids by finding stuff under the spoil heaps left by the builders. When the foundations of the thing were built the dead dog that was thrown onto the rubbish pile and burried gives us a clear date.

Newtons laws are not at all disproved by the three body problem. It's just beyond our present maths to solve it well.

Please stick to stuff you understand. This is just mad.
07-09-2016 17:15
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Buildreps wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Buildreps wrote:
If climate deniers also deny crustal slips, they are in fact standing with empty hands.

There, I've said it.

Higher eccentric orbits ⇒ larger oscillating (tidal) forces ⇒ crustal slips ⇒ changing latitudes ⇒ wrong interpretation of ice cores

Or were it the ancient pirates who secretly pulled on the crust?


I have not been keeping up with this thread. I generally don't read them when Ibeda denier is involved heavily.

Can you start a new thread about crustal slips please. I have not come across this idea in climate science.


No, I won't start it again. It is somewhere in the dungeons of this website, ridiculed by the most avid users of this site.


OK, I have had a look and it's utter drivel.

Clearly you have no science understanding at all.

We can date the building of the pyrimids by finding stuff under the spoil heaps left by the builders. When the foundations of the thing were built the dead dog that was thrown onto the rubbish pile and burried gives us a clear date.

Newtons laws are not at all disproved by the three body problem. It's just beyond our present maths to solve it well.

Please stick to stuff you understand. This is just mad.


Of course, that's the usual reaction. I stick to stuff I understand
07-09-2016 18:08
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Leafsdude wrote: You agree that forcings and feedbacks do occur, though, correct?

Not at all. You are speaking/writing within the context of religious dogma of the supernatural. It would like me asking you if you agree that the transubstantiation occurs at a Catholic mass.

Hey, while we're on the subject, do you believe that the transubstantiation occurs at a Catholic mass?

Leafsdude wrote: Or is this a fallacious special pleading?

I wouldn't want that. Just take ALL religious dogma away. Neither I nor science need any of it.


p.s. - that "rest of the context" seems to be taken from someone else.


.


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
07-09-2016 20:48
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
buildreps wrote: About 50% of the 300 ancient structures that were involved in this research ...

Any mathematician worth his salt would immediately recognize that the domain of structures is completely arbitrary, i.e. cherry-picked. This means that any conclusions based on percentages of structures involved are contrived and invalid.

buildreps wrote: ... are crossing four sections of together just 17° along the proposed intersection line.

OK. Got it.

buildreps wrote: The mathematical implication of this is impressive, ...

Nope. Not impressive.

buildreps wrote: ... since the structures are randomly spread around the world.

Nope. They are arbitrarily selected. There's nothing random about it.

buildreps wrote: Mathematicians understand the consequences of this, ...

Nope, there is no understanding of any consequences stemming from that.

buildreps wrote: ...especially when the details will be published: the probability that this is coincidence is 1 to 95,000.

Nope. False. The domain was arbitrary. The probability could have been arranged to create a virtual impossibility. The conclusion is invalid.


.


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
07-09-2016 21:48
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
IBdaMann wrote:
buildreps wrote: About 50% of the 300 ancient structures that were involved in this research ...

Any mathematician worth his salt would immediately recognize that the domain of structures is completely arbitrary, i.e. cherry-picked. This means that any conclusions based on percentages of structures involved are contrived and invalid.

buildreps wrote: ... are crossing four sections of together just 17° along the proposed intersection line.

OK. Got it.

buildreps wrote: The mathematical implication of this is impressive, ...

Nope. Not impressive.

buildreps wrote: ... since the structures are randomly spread around the world.

Nope. They are arbitrarily selected. There's nothing random about it.

buildreps wrote: Mathematicians understand the consequences of this, ...

Nope, there is no understanding of any consequences stemming from that.

buildreps wrote: ...especially when the details will be published: the probability that this is coincidence is 1 to 95,000.

Nope. False. The domain was arbitrary. The probability could have been arranged to create a virtual impossibility. The conclusion is invalid.


.


I see some false sloganizing as a response. Some people might even believe you.
There is nothing arbitrary about the outcomes.

Everyone is able to reproduce the conclusions, that is to say, if you're not too lazy for that.

Orientation in regard to our current geo pole is a mathematical phenomenon. Or do you like to disagree with that too?

You're just scared as hell this could be true...

Edited on 07-09-2016 21:50
07-09-2016 22:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Buildreps wrote: There is nothing arbitrary about the outcomes.

I didn't say there was. The outcomes are essentially predetermined by the arbitrary selection of the DOMAIN.

Your takeaway - predetermined conclusions.

Buildreps wrote: Everyone is able to reproduce the conclusions, that is to say, if you're not too lazy for that.

The problem is that anyone is free to arbitrarily choose a different domain which will then yield different conclusions.

Buildreps wrote: Orientation in regard to our current geo pole is a mathematical phenomenon. Or do you like to disagree with that too?

Oh you can bet I'm going to disagree. What you have might very well be a phenomenon, but it is physical, not mathematical. It is just a phenomenon. Pi is a mathematical phenomenon.

You are just as guilty of slinging the word "mathematical" around in an effort to impart additional importance onto things you revere, just like the warmizombies affix the word "scientific" to virtually everything.


Buildreps wrote: You're just scared as hell this could be true...

Let me check ... nope. I don't believe it is true but if tomorrow I were hit with incontrovertible evidence that it is true, my day will not change.

Do you know what "arbitrary" means?


.


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
07-09-2016 22:43
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
Wrong again, IBdaMann. Orientation is a mathematical phenomenon. You are not able to express it in something physical like a meter or time. Or are you able to do that, IBdaMann?

The fact is that you are a professional denier. You deny climate change and you deny crustal slips. You don't even know you're standing with empty hands to explain glaciations.

Climate worshippers have their false paradigm of CO2, but at least they have something.

What do you have?
Edited on 07-09-2016 22:44
08-09-2016 01:20
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Buildreps wrote:Wrong again, IBdaMann. Orientation is a mathematical phenomenon.

Incorrect. The position and orientation of some physical phenomenon is a characteristic of that phenomenon. Math that might be applied is still a completely separate thing. No math is needed to gather evidence at the scene of the murder.

The Pythagorean theorem is mathematical. It only has meaning in math. A four-year-old can discern which side of a pyramid is facing the sun, or that there is a side facing the sun, with no math required.

Buildreps wrote:You are not able to express it in something physical like a meter or time. Or are you able to do that, IBdaMann?

I can express orientation just as easily as you can express the color "green."

Buildreps wrote:The fact is that you are a professional denier.

I deny that.

Buildreps wrote:You deny climate change and you deny crustal slips.

Yes, I don't buy the "Climate" goddess thing but if it floats your boat then more power to you.

I assume the crust floats so it will drift rather than "slip," yes?


.


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
08-09-2016 09:58
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
All right, you have even the right to deny you exist. Are you an illusion?

I deny that the universe is material, it is solely mathematical, which is why we are able to use science.
08-09-2016 13:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Buildreps wrote:
All right, you have even the right to deny you exist. Are you an illusion?

I deny that the universe is material, it is solely mathematical, which is why we are able to use science.

What is matter?


.


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
08-09-2016 16:03
Buildreps
★☆☆☆☆
(100)
IBdaMann wrote:
Buildreps wrote:
All right, you have even the right to deny you exist. Are you an illusion?

I deny that the universe is material, it is solely mathematical, which is why we are able to use science.

What is matter?


.


That is too off topic. You will probably accuse me I don't know. Better read the God Series of the Illuminati, written by Mike Hockney. After that we might possibly have a talk about that.

First things first; we still haven't solved the problem of CO2 lagging behind on temperatures. You will of course not really get into the issue, except showing obstinate behaviour.

The proposed earth crust shifts in the latitudinal direction are in fact violating none of our current laws, and they solve all the problems we are witnessing about:
- the current climate change;
- our ancient history, and why nothing really has been explained;
- the waxing and waning of glaciations;
- the striking relation between eccentricity and glaciation cycles;
- the mythical tales of floods (of course types like you find this bullshit);

I think I'm done on this thread. If it's up to me, it's dead.
08-09-2016 16:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Buildreps wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Buildreps wrote:I deny that the universe is material, it is solely mathematical, which is why we are able to use science.

What is matter?

That is too off topic.

Whoa! Easy there tiger. "Material" semantically derives from "matter." How can you state that you deny the universe is material but then claim that a question about matter in the universe is "off topic"?

Is there matter in the universe?
Do you deny that the universe is material?

Buildreps wrote:I think I'm done on this thread. If it's up to me, it's dead.

Did you just realize that you backed yourself into a corner without the intellectual courage to face the problems with your faith?


.


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
08-09-2016 23:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
IBdaMann wrote:
What is matter?


What is Mind? No matter.

What is matter? Never mind.

-- Homer Simpson


The Parrot Killer
09-09-2016 00:47
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5208)
Into the Night wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
What is matter?


What is Mind? No matter.

What is matter? Never mind.

-- Homer Simpson

Yes, it is a question best left to philosophers.


.


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
09-09-2016 04:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10196)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
What is matter?


What is Mind? No matter.

What is matter? Never mind.

-- Homer Simpson

Yes, it is a question best left to philosophers.


.

At least when Matt comes up with something like this for Homer Simpson, he is able to express so concisely beer gut philosophy.



The Parrot Killer
Edited on 09-09-2016 04:51
Page 3 of 3<123





Join the debate CO2 Lags About 2,000 Years Behind on Temperature Changes:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Why can't you say Venus is hotter than Mercury because Venus got CO2?2609-12-2019 22:14
There is no scientific theory or evidence that suggest CO2 traps heat better than O2 or N222509-12-2019 18:13
Poulation controll revisited - CO2 compensation through population control814-11-2019 23:28
Is it not true that brains shrink due to increase in CO2 displacing O2?208-11-2019 18:45
Next year will the first year since lord knows when CO2 is more than 400 ppm all year at Moana Loa305-11-2019 18:15
▲ 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