Earth Day Aprill 22, 2015
- Thread starter Cliffy
- Start date
Ain`t that one sorta philly-soffikal
What do you expect? CC is a loony bin.
That much, for sure, is true.
Still passing the same tired old lie. Just because you keep repeating keep repeating keep repeating yourself will not make it true.
Tree Power!
Hug A Tree Today!
Bugger a hugger today. Much more fun and no slivers.
really? Let's examine the full extent of your own BULLSHYTE and desperation here in the following which presents the exact quote-stream exchange: in regards the relatively recent Nazca vandalism, media reports included references that Peruvians themselves were involved in the described vandalism... a CC member expresses his, "hard time in understanding how Peruvians themselves could be involved." I reply to that comment in regards to the role the Peruvians held as described in the media reports... they simply acted as guides and in that regard I speak to the monetary aspect related to the guide role performed. That's it! There's none of your desperation made-up scenario here... I'm not trying to counter another member (ala your idiotic and stooopid "I know better than you" nonsense); I'm simply offering an anecdote to provide the CC member a possible explanation. This is all rather benign and innocuous... or it was... until the dancingMan petros, aided and abetted by you the loyal lapdog, decided you'd play the azzhole-role you each relish on this board!
what's there in that simple single sentence statement to "call me on it"? Explain that... again, YOU provide your reason, your rationale, your basis, your foundation for, as you state, "calling me on it"? You've repeatedly stated you don't have a reason and you don't require a reason to claim I lied, to call bullshyte. That's right, you're simply a lapdog... repeatedly drawing reference back to this across multiple threads all throughout the subsequent 4 months since the original posting exchange was made. Such a sad lil' life you have that this... that I... preoccupy your CC board existence like this, hey lil' fella? Clearly, in your now aged geezer pensioner day-to-day life, this is what passes for giving you a reason to exist here! 4 months later... and I still maintain such a hold on you... I truly validate your very existence here, right? :mrgreen:
lost credibility to you and clubhouse BROs? Oh noooos! Say it ain't so, hey loyalLapdog!
says the guy who, 4 months later, keeps dredging this up... over and over and over again... digging your lapdogish hole deeper every day! :mrgreen:
taxi, you sure have a lot of time for your one-liner drive-by routine... how come you have no time to ever take up the repeated challenges put to you over your oft-made claims of, for example... as you just did again recently, "stating the IPCC has been repeatedly caught lying"? C'mon taxi! Step-up for once... just try to support and substantiate one of your called out statements! Sure you can, hey.
NOAA provides a running 3-month 'blended' graphic representation of land and sea-surface temperature percentiles. The most current (January-to-March), as below:
The first quarter of 2015 was the warmest such period on record across the world's land and ocean surfaces, at 0.82°C (1.48°F) above the 20th century average, surpassing the previous record of 2002 by 0.05°C (0.09°F). The average global land surface temperature was also record high for the January–March period, at 1.59°C (2.86°F). Most of Europe, Asia, South America, eastern Africa, and western North America were much warmer than average, as shown by the Temperature Percentiles map above, with record warmth particularly notable in the western United States and eastern Siberia along the Verkhoyansk Range.
The average global ocean surface temperature for January–March was the third highest in the 136-year period of record, at 0.53°C (0.95°F) above average. The record highest temperature for the period was 0.56°C (1.01°F) above average, observed in both 1998 and 2010. Similar to March and indicative of how slowly temperatures change in the oceans compared with the land, record warmth for the three-month period was notable in the northeastern Pacific Ocean and the southwest Pacific east of Australia, while the North Atlantic between Canada and the United Kingdom was much cooler than average, with a record cold swath within that region. The unusual warmth in the northeast Pacific has been observed for well over a year.
The average global ocean surface temperature for January–March was the third highest in the 136-year period of record, at 0.53°C (0.95°F) above average. The record highest temperature for the period was 0.56°C (1.01°F) above average, observed in both 1998 and 2010. Similar to March and indicative of how slowly temperatures change in the oceans compared with the land, record warmth for the three-month period was notable in the northeastern Pacific Ocean and the southwest Pacific east of Australia, while the North Atlantic between Canada and the United Kingdom was much cooler than average, with a record cold swath within that region. The unusual warmth in the northeast Pacific has been observed for well over a year.
caused, in part but principally by, man/anthropogenic sources. You are certainly encouraged to bring forward evidence/substantiation that speaks to an alternate principal causal tie; one other than anthropogenic sources.
And you still can't link to to the statement I supposedly made........
Your word doesn't mean shyte as anyone can see.
Dance, Bullshyte Weirdo, Dance!
The dodge and weave....and you really think nobody sees through all of what you post for what you really are.
Your pathetic self importance is legendary...................
Your word doesn't mean shyte as anyone can see.
Dance, Bullshyte Weirdo, Dance!
The dodge and weave....and you really think nobody sees through all of what you post for what you really are.
Your pathetic self importance is legendary...................
really? Let's examine the full extent of your own BULLSHYTE and desperation here in the following which presents the exact quote-stream exchange: in regards the relatively recent Nazca vandalism, media reports included references that Peruvians themselves were involved in the described vandalism... a CC member expresses his, "hard time in understanding how Peruvians themselves could be involved." I reply to that comment in regards to the role the Peruvians held as described in the media reports... they simply acted as guides and in that regard I speak to the monetary aspect related to the guide role performed. That's it! There's none of your desperation made-up scenario here... I'm not trying to counter another member (ala your idiotic and stooopid "I know better than you" nonsense); I'm simply offering an anecdote to provide the CC member a possible explanation. This is all rather benign and innocuous... or it was... until the dancingMan petros, aided and abetted by you the loyal lapdog, decided you'd play the azzhole-role you each relish on this board!
what's there in that simple single sentence statement to "call me on it"? Explain that... again, YOU provide your reason, your rationale, your basis, your foundation for, as you state, "calling me on it"? You've repeatedly stated you don't have a reason and you don't require a reason to claim I lied, to call bullshyte. That's right, you're simply a lapdog... repeatedly drawing reference back to this across multiple threads all throughout the subsequent 4 months since the original posting exchange was made. Such a sad lil' life you have that this... that I... preoccupy your CC board existence like this, hey lil' fella? Clearly, in your now aged geezer pensioner day-to-day life, this is what passes for giving you a reason to exist here! 4 months later... and I still maintain such a hold on you... I truly validate your very existence here, right? :mrgreen:imagine that! Somehow you have nothing to say in how I showed that your latest round of lapdog idiocy had no foundation... that your made-up scenario has no legs... where you claimed I posted that simple, benign and most innocuous single sentence statement to, as you said, "bolster or give credence", to what I was saying... in order to, presumably, counter or better a statement/argument being put forward by another member (MORE OF YOUR BULLSHYTE)! Such a sad lil' LAPDOG you are!
you've been repeatedly challenged to go beyond your lapdog act... that in regards that simple single sentence statement, to provide a basis, to provide a reason as to why you claimed, why you continue to claim that I lied, that I bullshyted. You have never done so! Ever! Instead, all you have is your lapdog act... your lapdog dance, your lapdog dodge, your lapdog weave!
other than simply being the lapdog you are, are you stating, are you claiming:
- that you have provided a basis... a reason... as to why you claimed/continue to claim, that I lied? Yes or No?
- that you didn't ask why you would actually need a reason? Yes or No?
- that you didn't ask why you would actually need a reason? Yes or No?
There is something seriously wrong with a person that insists on quoting to his own BS in a lame attempt to prove he is right.
take a number you one-liner drive-by lapdog! :mrgreen: Hey taxi, are you working on presenting your substantiation to your claims that "the IPCC has been caught repeatedly lying"? Will we see it soon, hey taxi?
No apology from IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri for glacier fallacy
Head of UN climate change body 'not at fault' for false claim Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035
The embattled chief of the UN's climate change body has hit out at his critics and refused to resign or apologise for a *damaging mistake in a landmark 2007 report on global warming.
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said it would be hypocritical to apologise for the false claim that *Himalayan glaciers could melt away by 2035, because he was not personally responsible for that part of the report. "You can't expect me to be personally responsible for every word in a 3,000 page report," he said.
The IPCC issued a statement that expressed regret for the mistake, but Pachauri said a personal apology would be a "populist" step.
"I don't do too many populist things, that's why I'm so unpopular with a certain section of society," he said.
No apology from IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri for glacier fallacy | Environment | The Guardian
Head of UN climate change body 'not at fault' for false claim Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035
The embattled chief of the UN's climate change body has hit out at his critics and refused to resign or apologise for a *damaging mistake in a landmark 2007 report on global warming.
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said it would be hypocritical to apologise for the false claim that *Himalayan glaciers could melt away by 2035, because he was not personally responsible for that part of the report. "You can't expect me to be personally responsible for every word in a 3,000 page report," he said.
The IPCC issued a statement that expressed regret for the mistake, but Pachauri said a personal apology would be a "populist" step.
"I don't do too many populist things, that's why I'm so unpopular with a certain section of society," he said.
No apology from IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri for glacier fallacy | Environment | The Guardian
as a part of the leadup to the Copenhagen COP meeting, there was a concentrated denier effort to undermine the IPCC; an effort that centered upon finding obscure "errors" within the sub-group WG2 report... the report that focuses on more of the social-sciences related to, "Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability" (with a regional emphasis)... a sub-report that has nothing to do with the underlying physical science.
in this particular case, the "error" was so dramatic and significant... that it sat "undisturbed" for 3 years after the report was released; i.e., much ado about nothing. That actual "error" reflected upon a non-peer reviewed publication that quoted the speculation of an Indian scientist... the actual report verbiage read, "In 1999, a report by the Working Group on Himalayan Glaciology (WGHG) of the International Commission for Snow and Ice (ICSI) stated: “glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 is very high". That's it... that the sole basis for the so-called "Glaciergate" buzz that resounded around the denialsphere and bounced on up into the mainstream courtesy of British tabloid "journalists" at their best worst.
for perspective on the insignificance of the "error"... it never became a major claim of the IPCC. As is the pattern for IPCC reports, all sub-group reports are worked through by coordinating lead authors with a summation intent... a key facet of this effort is one intended to ensure continuity of like/related statements across the various sub-group reports. In this particular case, the "error" went "uncorrected" and remained buried within the depths of the WG2 sub-group report. With emphasis, it never materialized within the final summary Synthesis Report, or the Technical Summary Report, or the Summary for Policymakers Report. Again, it was never a major claim made by the IPCC... it was simply an obscure sub-group report reference that wasn't caught in the review process... within the thousands of pages of IPCC reports.
the official IPCC position on glacier melt was contained in one of those IPCC summary reports, the IPCC Synthesis Report... the summation detail that reflects the so-called stated claims/positions of the IPCC (a reflection of the 'rolled-up' detail from the sub-group reports). This is the actual relevant statement from the IPCC AR4 Synthesis Report as concerns glacier melt, particularly Himalayan glacier melt:
Climate change is expected to exacerbate current stresses on water resources from population growth and economic and land-use change, including urbanisation. On a regional scale, mountain snow pack, glaciers and small ice caps play a crucial role in freshwater availability. Widespread mass losses from glaciers and reductions in snow cover over recent decades are projected to accelerate throughout the 21st century, reducing water availability, hydropower potential, and changing seasonality of flows in regions supplied by meltwater from major mountain ranges (e.g. Hindu-Kush, Himalaya, Andes), where more than one-sixth of the world population currently lives.
..
.
a relatively recent CC thread touched upon current glacier melt across the earth... all the usual suspect deniers here were in full force either denying glacier melt or attributing it to... anything but warming! As it happens, I killed the thread... killed it real good, with the following post to the point no one made any other follow-up posts - go figure!
GLOBAL LAND ICE MEASUREMENTS FROM SPACE (GLIMS): an international collaboration (including the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center) and 60+ other institutions across the globe... all working to provide the most comprehensive report to date on global glacier changes. In that regard, the latest publication from GLIMS: "Worldwide retreat of glaciers confirmed in unprecedented detail"
The book, Global Land Ice Measurements from Space, presents an overview and detailed assessment of changes in the world’s glaciers by using satellite imagery from optical satellite instruments such as ASTER (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer) and Landsat.
While the shrinking of glaciers on all continents is already known from ground observations of individual glaciers, by using repeated satellite observations GLIMS has firmly established that glaciers are shrinking globally. Although some glaciers are maintaining their size, most glaciers are dwindling. The foremost cause of the worldwide reductions in glaciers is global warming, the team writes.
The full-color book has twenty-five regional chapters that illustrate glacier changes from the Arctic to the Antarctic. Other chapters provide a thorough theoretical background on glacier monitoring and mapping, remote sensing techniques, uncertainties, and interpretation of the observations in a climatic context. The book highlights many other glacier research applications of satellite data, including measurement of glacier thinning from repeated satellite-based digital elevation models (DEMs) and calculation of surface flow velocities from repeated satellite images.
gee, and here I thought the thread had moved on! But of course, being the degenerate you are, let's play some more: your lies are front and center - no matter how hard you try to deflect and distract from them. You lied when you stated there were no buses! You lied when you stated there was no road. You lied. I presented the images of the buses, of the buses traveling on the road and of the bus schedule. You lied. Get it?
guys, guys... a report error... an inconsequential report error in a 1000 page sub-report... one of many 1000+ page sub-reports. Something that had no bearing on anything... something that was not included in any of the summary position reports the IPCC creates... it was not a summary position or statement presented or held by the IPCC. That's your standard of a LIE? :mrgreen:
gee they sure didn't do that, as you claim, "lie", any justice, did they? Buried deep in that sub-report... so deep it took 3 years and a concentrated denier focused effort to "dredge up" report errors in lead-up to the 2010 Copenhagen Cop meetings.
lie: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
taxi! The trolling one-liner drive-by specialist extraordinaire!
gee they sure didn't do that, as you claim, "lie", any justice, did they? Buried deep in that sub-report... so deep it took 3 years and a concentrated denier focused effort to "dredge up" report errors in lead-up to the 2010 Copenhagen Cop meetings.
lie: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
taxi! The trolling one-liner drive-by specialist extraordinaire!
Last edited: