OT GW - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: OT GW

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You would be around 870Kms too far away for that purpose.



Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I realise that you will now claim that I am calling atec77 an idiot,
because I he opposes everything I say, but you'd be wrong. atec77 is,
demonstrably, a complete idiot.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it
just shows how little tweva matters , sydney then as I hear his silly
little shop is hidden in some backwater at the wrong side of town for me
so the visiting might be to much trouble , either way the bloke is still
a fuckwitt

--









X-No-Archive: Yes


Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I suspect his riverside location will become a boat moorage if the
oceans rise.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**How would you know?


  They have no a clue on what is really
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Since you have admitted that you have failed to read AR4, you cannot
condemn it. You are speaking from a position of ignorance.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**You lied. I called you on that lie. Simple. Stop lying and I won't
have to point out your lies.

Your snipping of the lies about Sciam is duly noted.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au


Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nope, I stated what I knew from that time. I have no ias one way or the
other, but you have.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nope, you just call everything you do not like a lie.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That was where I read it.
Read the one on global dimming?



Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**And, after I pointed out your error, you continued to claim that I was
wrong. At that point, your error became a lie. See the difference?
Repeating a lie once is an error. Continued repeating of a lie, is a lie
in itself.

  I have no ias one way or the
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I merely corrected your error, then I pointed out your lie.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Not so. A lie is a lie. You lied.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Cite.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Along with a bunch of other stuff, yes. Have you taken the time to
read AR4 yet? Or do you prefer to wallow in ignorance?

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au


Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it
This?
http://www.burtonsys.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.

Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Bloody hell, for an "expert" on spotting good and bad "science" you
are a real riot Trev.

On the other hand, based on what we see these days, it is possible
that DDT ill effects
were pushed aside for financial gain - kind of like what "warmists" do
now for financial gain, or to protect financial gain..

Much easier to do back then with no internet or other
public ways of mass info dissemination other than mainstream media.


Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**OK. Then YOU tell us what all those organisations said about DDT. I
don't know. terryc doesn't know.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**FIRST, you have to make the point about the above-mentioned
organisations and what they claimed about DDT. In the case of AGW, the
warnings have been made since the 19th century. Long before anyone had
any alleged financial gain in the matter.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Actual data is data but incorrectly collected or arrived at data is not
and that is part of the problem.
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: OT GW
says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Look for DDT wallpaper for childrens rooms to kill nasty flies and such.
I'm sure it was in/on our boomer baby food too.

Al
-
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.

Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it



Fallacy: Appeal to authority.

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Hypothecised.  And others showed the flaws in his experiment.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Mounting evidence? Steaming piles of manure.
Pure Gedankenexperiments and soothsaying akin to reading the
entrails of chickens.

The theory has been falsified because the MEASUREMENTS in the REAL
WORLD prove it to be wrong.

CO2 levels have risen steadily for more than a decade ... but no
global temperature increase. Even a slight cooling. Pronounced
cooling is you look at the temperature of the oceans; the climate
system's most-significant store of heat.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nice bunch of strawmen. And you can line up beside them and nobody
will be able to tell the difference.

You, like so many others, are too lazy or afraid to do your own
thinking. To go back to first principles and to tackle the
underlying physics and biological cycles that make the climate what
it is.
<http://contrary2belief.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/global-warming/
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | For every complex problem there is an
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Sure. Happy to do so. The massive weight of scientific investigation
lies with AGW as being a reality. It is up to those who don't accept
that massive weight of scientific opinion to produce some data that
contradicts ALL the above organisations. Could they ALL be wrong? Sure.
Is it likely that they're ALL wrong and Alan Jones, George Pell and
Monckton are right? Nup. Not likely at all.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Sure. The data generated was not perfect, but the theory has been
validated (experimentally) many times since.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Yes. Mounting evidence.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Cite your science that proves them all wrong.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**That would be a lie, rooted in igorance.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


**Cite.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Another lie. Worse, a lie, based on careful cherry-picked data.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Another lie.



  Pronounced
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Indeed.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090916_globalstats.html

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**After you've read the IPCC AR4, provide us with a page-by-page
refutation of the data.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au


Re: OT GW

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I believe there have been a number of such counter claims, and from some
credible sources, yet there seems to be none that you will accept.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Of course they could. Are you saying it's impossible for a large number
of people to be wrong?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Why do you keep resorting to this infantile insulting of people who
don't share your views Trevor? It really does your case no favours....



--
Regards,
Noddy.

Re: OT GW

Quoted text here. Click to load it

He has no case. Just a mindless reciting of rote.


Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it


He reminds me of something Ah - I remember now :


"Polly want a cracker"

<Squawk!>

"Polly want a cracker"

Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**I'll bite. List those claims and their sources that you feel are
credible. I will discuss each and every one with you.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Of course not. Look at the Catholics. However, unlike the Catholics,
AGW researchers have quite a number of 'runs on the board'. Let's look
at a very quick snapshot of what the issue entails:

* The planet has warmed at a faster rate in the last 100-odd years, than
at any time in the last 600,000 years. FACT. No dispute.
* The planet has accumulated CO2 in the atmosphere at a faster rate than
at any time in the last 600,000 years. FACT. No dispute.
* CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. FACT. No dispute. The contribution of
CO2 to planetary warming has been known for more than 100 years. It has
been shown experimentally many times. Even Mythbusters were surprised
when they performed the experiment. VERY tiny amounts of CO2 can and do
cause 'Solar forcing' (Additional warming).
* As the planet warms, more CO2 will outgas from the oceans. FACT. No
dipute.
* As the planet warms, methane will be released from permafrost areas.
Methane is a MUCH more potent GHG than CO2. Fortunately, methane breaks
down rapidly (about 10 years) in the atmosphere. UNFORTUNATELY, CO2 is
one of the breakdown products. CO2 has a very long life in the
atmoshere. FACT. No dispute.
* All this is thought to lead to a kind of positive feedback (aka:
'Tipping Point'), where more CO2 leads to hotter temperatures, which, in
turn, leads to more GHGs being released into the atmosphere, which, in
turn, leads to higher temperatures, more GHGs and so on. The 'Tipping
Point' is thought to be around 500ppm. SPECULATIVE. Plenty of dispute.
In fact, at least one researcher is of the opinion that the tipping
point has already been reached.

So, the upshot is, that we are really only arguing a single point:

Will the release of more CO2 cause irreparable damage to the planet?

We don't know for certain. The general concensus amongst most climate
scientists is that more CO2 will lead to irreparable problems.

Further to that point: Like most things in life, early attention will
cost a whole lot less than dealing with it later.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

**It is very important that those who embrace the non-scientific
approach be made aware of the people that share their views.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au


Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The people that share those views is referred to as  "The Majority of
Australians"

Quoted text here. Click to load it




Interesting too, how he accuses anyone who disagrees with him of
having religious
motives or associations, but to date, no one has brought up religion
except him.

This time it is Catholics who are referred to.




Re: OT GW
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Of course. I never assumed that the majority of Australians were
particularly bright. Did you? Look at the success of the following:

* Alan Jones
* The Murdoch Press
* Its a Knockout
* The Bolt Report
* Today
* A Current Affair
* Danoz
* Sunrise
* Deal or no Deal
* Today Tonight
* Etc

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Bollocks. No, not bollocks. An outright lie. What I DO accuse those
who have dissagreed with me (in this thread) of being is ignorant. None
have admitted to reading the IPCC AR4.


, but to date, no one has brought up religion
Quoted text here. Click to load it

**Another lie. I suggest you read the thread carefully.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

**And I was not the first.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Site Timeline