row_33 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 By the looks of him, is AL Gore eating more than 1,000 people in countries he cries about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Why do you think he mentioned Pittsburgh? Because it begins with "P" just like "Paris" does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Because it begins with "P" just like "Paris" does. Well I was waiting for Gator to figure that out. But thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) I think that perhaps I am being to critical of this board's left posters, I mean if you read the childish responses of the democrat 'leaders', why do I think that their followers will be any smarter. Latest example: Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe: Trump Withdrawing from Paris Accord ‘One of the Dumbest Decisions I’ve Ever Heard’. “I think the motive is he’s trying to protect the oil barons in this country.” Oil Barons ?? McAuliffe should really update his objects of Two Minutes Hate for the 21st Century. . Edited June 2, 2017 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 It was on CNN, someone was appointed to speak on behalf of al scientists, by fiat and deem what science knows. That kind of contradicts everything in the history of true science. But if someone said it on a soundbite on CNN... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 My college professor told me that the entire Southwest would run out of water by the year 2010 and be completely evacuated by 2015. He had this "fact" on his final exam. The only people still fooled by Climate Change are the ones too young to remember more than one doomsday prediction. What parts of global warming don't you believe in? It's irrefutable that we are in a warming trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 This board has become a haven for conspiracists in the last few months. Greg coming out of ge closet made the rest follow. I preferred don't ask don't tell. Greg, in no small part, is just having fun. Dante, though, is truly nuts. I want to know what he thinks about Ryan Miller's eyesight. So I should believe the scientists, thank you. "Scientists" I'm a scientist. And I say you shouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Well I was waiting for Gator to figure that out. But thanks. The definition of infinity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Ben, the man who cooked it up can't locate his papers proving it. It isn't disprovable, it isn't replicable, it has zero validity in predicting future results. The people who worship the junk science all fall on the wrong side of policy on war, economics, child raising, crime control... you name it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Greg, in no small part, is just having fun. Dante, though, is truly nuts. I want to know what he thinks about Ryan Miller's eyesight. Oldie but a goodie, and website crossing of the streams too. That sabrespace crowd defends Dwight as "their personal lunatic." If you go after him as nuts, people won't defend the accusation but they will attack you as going after one of their own. I respect that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Oldie but a goodie, and website crossing of the streams too. That sabrespace crowd defends Dwight as "their personal lunatic." If you go after him as nuts, people won't defend the accusation but they will attack you as going after one of their own. I respect that. I can respect that, too. If some jackass came here all high-and-mighty and started attacking gatorman... ...well, if some jackass came her all high-and-mighty and started attacking Greg, I'd certainly defend him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 I can respect that, too. If some jackass came here all high-and-mighty and started attacking gatorman... ...well, if some jackass came her all high-and-mighty and started attacking Greg, I'd certainly defend him. Whew....nice save. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imissbeastmode Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 Green energy is a ponzi scheme. All anyone have to do is look up the Solar City plant in Buffalo that hasn't hired anyone. Whole thing was a prop to launder money. Climate scientists are funded through taxpayers. If they say climate change isn't real, they'll lose their jobs, as there will be no need for them. They will ride climate change right to retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 (edited) What parts of global warming don't you believe in? It's irrefutable that we are in a warming trend. That's not how science works. Especially when they want us to believe it's "settled." They need to show that they can predict and reproduce results. Right now it's all just guesses. It would be the same if someone got a fever and a shaman told people it's because he's possessed by a demon and we must all pay him 10% of our income to burn incense. What could it hurt? Think of the children! Edited June 3, 2017 by unbillievable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 That's not how science works. Especially when they want us to believe it's "settled." They need to show that they can predict and reproduce results. Right now it's all just guesses. It would be the same if someone got a fever and a shaman told people it's because he's possessed by a demon and we must all pay him 10% of our income to burn incense. What could it hurt? Think of the children! You answered a different question. The warming trend is observable. I like that DT exited the accords from the perspective of overexpansion of presidential authority. Now if only he had relied on that reasoning and not some of the other gobbledygook logic he talked about on Wednesday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 I agree, for a deal that massive, 67 votes in the Senate are needed. That is all he needed to say, instead he is getting the blame from world leaders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 Every community of work has its own special language of process and quasi-deception against those who aren't part of them. Works for doctors, accountants, plumbers, cars salesmen. When a "civilian" with no understanding takes them at face value, the civilian is deceived, mostly it doesn't matter. Science is no different. Pretending you have scientific understanding because CNN or the NY Times pontificated is foolish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 Back to Paris................. PROOF THAT TRUMP IS RIGHT ABOUT PARIS President Trump withdrew from the Paris climate accord because our participation would have done nothing for the environment, but would have damaged America’s economy. . From Germany comes conclusive evidence that pulling out of the agreement will help our economy: Germany’s powerful car industry said Europe would need to reassess its environmental standards to remain competitive after the United States said it would withdraw from the Paris climate pact. So Paris will make participating countries’ economies less competitive. Note that while the Germans are willing to incur inefficiency as long as other countries go along–or at least pretend to go along–if they have to choose between their economy and the purported threat of global climate catastrophe, they will choose their economy. Which means that they don’t believe in the reality of the supposed climate calamity any more than we do. TED CRUZ CRUSHES BIZARRE ATTACK ON PARIS WITHDRAWAL POST “FACT-CHECKERS” SWING AND MISS AT TRUMP’S PARIS ACCORD SPEECH By now, most people understand that “fact-checkers” for organs like the Washington Post are just liberals trying to package their talking points under a byline they hope will bolster their waning credibility. That’s certainly the case with this Washington Post “fact check” (by Glenn Kessler and Michelle Ye Hee Lee) of President Trump’s explanation for withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 Back to Paris................. PROOF THAT TRUMP IS RIGHT ABOUT PARIS President Trump withdrew from the Paris climate accord because our participation would have done nothing for the environment, but would have damaged America’s economy. . From Germany comes conclusive evidence that pulling out of the agreement will help our economy: So Paris will make participating countries’ economies less competitive. Germany’s powerful car industry said Europe would need to reassess its environmental standards to remain competitive after the United States said it would withdraw from the Paris climate pact. Note that while the Germans are willing to incur inefficiency as long as other countries go along–or at least pretend to go along–if they have to choose between their economy and the purported threat of global climate catastrophe, they will choose their economy. Which means that they don’t believe in the reality of the supposed climate calamity any more than we do. TED CRUZ CRUSHES BIZARRE ATTACK ON PARIS WITHDRAWAL Well, THAT was idiotic. One could also point out that the "international" agreement was between the US and Britain alone, and that contrary to French expectations, the US pursued their own course independent of any foreign considerations...rather like Trump did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted June 3, 2017 Share Posted June 3, 2017 (edited) You answered a different question. The warming trend is observable. I like that DT exited the accords from the perspective of overexpansion of presidential authority. Now if only he had relied on that reasoning and not some of the other gobbledygook logic he talked about on Wednesday... You don't know what you're asking. Observation is just the first step in the process. It's more important trying to figure out what's causing it and by how much. The only thing the climatologists have proven is that they don't know how any of it works; and they don't even want to find out. So why waste so much money on a random guess? Edited June 3, 2017 by unbillievable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts