Search results

Holy crap...it was sarcasm....maybe I should have put a smiley in there. Do you know what Poe's law is? Poe's Law - RationalWiki

The controversial assumption. Have you stopped beating your wife? Can you give me a straight answer to that question, yes or no? It's rhetoric. You started out from an assumption that scientists in this field (perhaps you think all scientists are part of some scam) are part of some...

There is no straight answer to your loaded questions. Your questions assume something, without giving any validation for your assumption. Like I said earlier...

I don't know, ask your corporate sponsors how it's working for them.

It's so hot out. How hot is it? It's so hot, that thermometers in Los Angeles were popping. Record breaking, and thermometer breaking temperatures. Los Angeles set an all time high, 113°F. It got as high as 119°F in the foot hills, as measured by a LAFD station. What a cold world. Brutal.

So then I assume you've seen the meeting minutes and the charter that our great organization has laid out? Seriously, you nutters are so funny.

A plan to rule the world stretching back to pre-Victorian Times?! That rivals Freemasonry!

This guy really nailed it. It explains the problem precisely with how reporters now create their narratives, and strive for a balance. Except it's not a narrative balanced or tempered with objective truth, but rather the extreme ends of spectrums where the middle road exists only half-way...

First off, there's a difference between a skeptic and a denier. I'm skeptical of claims like this because your claim relies on conspiracy at all levels, and cannot possibly be validated. When evidence is given against fraud and conspiracy it's just used as more evidence of conspiracy... There is...

For those who want to know what he actually said: Pretty big distinction between no ice at the North Pole, and an ice-free Arctic...but then again why worry about getting facts right when your mode is to deny reality?

You really need to read more carefully. If you read the bit above what you quoted from Avro, he said scientific bodies retract mistakes. Deniers do not. They repeat the same crap over and over again.

Stay on topic. The bad idea we're talking about is killing corals. Start another thread if you want to talk aquaculture.

In a few millenia...in the meantime the oceans lose massive amounts of biomass.

Yes, that's exactly what I said: "The rate of change right now exceeds the majority of natural ocean chemistry and temperature changes in the past, with few exceptions." Little change for corals? Cruised right on through? What is your basis for those statements?

Re: 2010, another year of extreme coral bleaching No, that would not be accurate. What would be accurate is to say that all measurements have errors, and ignoring that fact to say that an estimate is inherently flawed is wrong. We're not wrong because we can't pinpoint the mass of a rock to a...

For Praxius, who asked what can be done, building reefs. Good video here: BBC Life

Re: 2010, another year of extreme coral bleaching Yes...you can calculate, therefore it's an estimate. Does a plane engine with 1,000 flying hours perform the same as an engine with 1,000,000 hours? You get an estimate when you calculate. Just as you do with a volcano. No, you don't see...

Re: 2010, another year of extreme coral bleaching How do you know that? Nobody has come forward...they will be prosecuted for criminal activity if they do. They don't even have the principle to admit that, even though- as you state -they feel their actions were inherently just. Intellectually...

Definitely. We're leaving the cozycene for the anthopocene.

I for one have said point blank to everyone in here who has asked me, that it has been some of both man and nature, and always will be. The natural forcings were very prominent early in the 20th century, but simply haven't been as important for the past 60 years. It shouldn't be difficult for...