Search results

Sometimes warming sometimes cooling... Recently, things have been cooling. Face facts, you cut-paste the reference section of "the latest IPCC report" (according to the post in question)... I am familiar with the IPCC report(s). What I have "submitted" that I feel is the most...

I never did dispute that the climatic conditions are changing. In fact, they have all throught history and that reality is the basis of my position in that what we are seeing now is an expression of the natural cycle. No.. What you did was cut/paste a bunch of names/studies. You presented nor...

Civility would be a nice change - somehow I doubt that we will enjoy it for very long.

Sure.. But in the end, we have been pursuing this ends all along. Regardless, I will happily participate. For the sake of clarity from the outset, there are caveats attached: The discussion be focused on establishing that anthropogenic sources (carbon dioxide) are a significant contributor...

I do not believe that the core issue is whether the globe is warming or cooling in terms of an overall trend. Ultimately, that cycle has occurred in the past and will be observable far into the future. In my mind, this issue is in question based on the contention(s) of establishing "why" these...

Now you are talking about my believing in the info sources that I am critical of.. Are you then suggesting that unless I march lock-step with he attitude, opinion and beliefs of others, I am not deserving of anything other than your derision? C'mon.. Get real

No... Not even you. In fact, I believe that you have a basic foundation in critical analysis, however, the fact that you are so myopic in your vision, incapable of original thought, lacking flexibility, devoid of creativity and arrogant - well, that erases any of the intelligent design that you...

Really Anna. My exchange with Les represented an equal-opportunity diatribe... Regrettably, when an individual jumps down my throat with insinuations, innuendo and insults - I give back in turn. You are more than welcome to review my exchanges with Les and I believe that you will see that I am...

I'll leave the tea-leaf readings (and bumps on skulls) to you. Yet, that admission to the mistake is somehow a carte-blanche license to go on the attack? Really, I am not certain what to make of your's and Les' comments other than being derogatory.

Are you referring to your little-minded, myopic view of science? No thanks - I take a more macro view of the topic. BTW - Any contributions that clearly point to anthropogenic sources of ghg's (or whatever BS you buy into) that are a measurable and significant driver of (shudder) global...

Australopithecine - That's an awfully big word for you..... Do ya need a wee rest now or maybe you want to debate the suitability of journalists and zoologists on the issue?

Like I said, you identify the components in each study that undermine the notion that the alterations are directly caused in a highly significant manner by anthropogenic sources... I will deal with the concerns then. Clear? Nope. Your questions are far too broad. narrow them down...

I'm waiting for you to go through each study and provide the concrete details that refute the reality that changes in climatic conditions are not the result of natural cycles... Once you've done that, I will tell you where your mistakes are. NO.. They are wrong because they are frauds that...

Perhaps they will take a page from Tonnington's Big Book-'O-Spin that attempts (poorly I might add) to legitimize the voodoo science that is the AGW movement today.

At one time, that glacier never existed.. What's your point?

Careful if you seek the answer from any of the aforementioned.. They could tell ya - but then they'd have to kill ya. You know, secrets and all.

Please see the ad hominem example by the IPCC. You do recall the 2500 scientists they claimed supported the document fiasco, right?

.. So, the three eco-fascists respond in the expected fashion. The long list of studies provided by fascist #1 is a compilation of the latest IPCC report. "Evidence" from a skewed, politically motivated and corrupt body... How compelling.. The apologist Op-Ed impresses only those mental...

Are they IPCC approved? Any of them from the CRU at East Anglia?.... Consider them refuted

What about the Kool-Aid? pwnd? Funny - By that do you mean that you have no argument? I suppose so.