Climategate

1132133135137138153

Comments

  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    The problem is that you are not interested in science.



    OMG---jg is dialoguing. Actually I'm interested in science. I used SCIENCE to refute your bloggers. You have yet to respond to the links I provided to show that there is strong SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE based upon SCIENCE and FACTS that the crap you posted is bogus---where's your SCIENCE?



  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member


    INSTEAD OF MORE OF THIS:



    TRY THIS AS YOUR SOURCE:

    Skeptic Arguments and What the Science Says



    SCIENCE PLEASE
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Those who are interested in science do not feel the need to refute anything.



    They let the facts speak for themselves.



    Thus far, all the facts I've seen lead me to one conclusion: the science of climate change and to what extent humans are impacting it is NOT SETTLED.
  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Those who are interested in science do not feel the need to refute anything.



    A lot of Science is about refuting or supporting colleagues' research. Some of the controversies in science like Continental Drift and the years of controversies of CD lead to bitter rivalries lasting years of published papers being challenged and refuted. That's kind of how SCIENCE is conducted. Another example is found in the extinction of dinosaurs controversy.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    They let the facts speak for themselves.



    When you present SCIENTIFIC FACTS, then they will speak for themselves.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Thus far, all the facts I've seen lead me to one conclusion: the science of climate change and to what extent humans are impacting it is NOT SETTLED.



    If what you have posted are" facts" leading you to your conclusion, then sorry your conclusions are wrong, because the "facts" you have presented are not based upon SCIENCE but are misinterpretations the SCIENCE in the cited by your blog links.



    I'll agree that the SCIENCE isn't fully settled---but the evidence is heavily weighed to AGW.----check out some what I have posted and keep away from the bloggers. Go to Science or Nature for more credible facts and SCIENCE. YOu might also want to check out the AMS site on Climate Change.



    Quote:

    "Be not astonished at new ideas; for it is well known to you that a thing does not therefore cease to be true because it is not accepted by many."



    ? Benedictus de Spinoza
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    I assure you I have read all the links you posted. I have just arrived at a different conclusion than you.
  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Report: Global Warming Issue From 2 Or 3 Years Ago May Still Be Problem







    Quote:

    WASHINGTON?According to a report released this week by the Center for Global Development, climate change, the popular mid-2000s issue that raised awareness of the fact that the earth's continuous rise in temperature will have catastrophic ecological effects, has apparently not been resolved, and may still be a problem......



    "Global warming, if you remember correctly, was the single greatest problem of our lifetime back in 2007 and the early part of 2008," CGD president Nancy Birdsall said. "But then the debates over Social Security reform and the World Trade Center mosque came up, and the government had to shift its focus away from the dramatic rise in sea levels, the rapid spread of deadly infectious diseases, and the imminent destruction of our entire planet."........



    Thus far, the study has gained unanimous favor in the scientific community, which was admittedly surprised in 2008 and 2009 at how quickly a defining issue that will undoubtedly affect everyone on the planet became so heavily politicized and took a backseat to health care reform, the housing bubble, and replacing Jay Leno on The Tonight Show.



    "Climate change is real, and we are killing our planet more every day," said climatologist Helen Marcus, who has made similar statements in interviews in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010. "We need to make a serious effort to stop it, or, you know, we'll all die. There really isn't much else to say."



  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,297member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    I assure you I have read all the links you posted. I have just arrived at a different conclusion than you.



    For fun we should just insinuate that because FT disagrees with you, he is totally uninformed on the matter and clearly is ignoring everything you've posted.



    I mean we've clearly got proof this is true because darn it, he still disagrees!



    Obviously if he knew what you knew, he would do what you do, and likewise think what you think.



    When you've got "the one true answer" all dissention and opposition is impossible.
  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    I assure you I have read all the links you posted. I have just arrived at a different conclusion than you.



    Yeah, I expected that, I guess it's my fault expecting that you would actually comprehend the SCIENCE in the postings. You've been reading and putting too much faith in bloggers far too long to understand the SCIENCE.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    I am not a scientist, but I have always considered the words "scientist" and "skeptic" to be synonymous.



    You're confused about scientist, skeptics and denier. The case is scientist>skeptic ≠ skeptic>scientist. Not all skeptics are scientist. Scientist are by nature skeptics, they develop a hypothesis, perform experiments and observations and examine the results. If the data doesn't support the hypothesis then it is wrong. Skeptics may not believe in science and will deny anything is true if it is contrary to their beliefs, even if the evidence proves otherwise. But a skeptic may be swayed by the facts and evidences eventually---if not then they are deniers.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Or maybe I can just keep posting links to relevant information in this thread and you can ignore them.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    You seem to find the concept of a forum problematic.

    If you look on the previous page, you will see that you post twelve links in separate posts to climate denial blogs.

    Fine Tunes debunks several.

    And you ignore him. I think you spend two or three posts on him, and only one is longer than a single line.

    You?re not interested in discussion. We can tell this because you don?t defend any of your posts.

    If you?re not interested in what people have to say, I think a blog would be better for you, and you could stop bumping this thread.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Can't help but notice that jazzguru didn't bother to respond to your posts, again.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BR View Post


    So true. He isn't looking for conversation anywhere. Challenge his beliefs? He puts his head in the sand. He's not worth talking to.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BR View Post


    Jazzy, here you go again demonstrating that you really don't understand climate science one bit. Worthless. Utterly worthless.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    First the problem is that the links to "relevant information" is not relevant since is refuted and made irrelevant---but you fail to see it.



    scientist>skeptic ≠ skeptic>scientist.



    The key word is relevant. Most of your sources are faulty blogger denier's sites that have nothing to do with science. You have ignored any challenges about the validity of your postings which means that you cannot support your position that AGW is real. I cannot ignore your postings because others reading them may actually believe them to be fact, when in reality they are based upon pseudo science or draw contrary conclusions from the cited papers without any foundation.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Nice. Note the use of the word "deniers" instead of "skeptics". Deniers, of course, has the same connotation as "holocaust deniers".



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BR View Post


    That's the huge fallacy that we have in this nation. You can't just bring on a dissenting opinion and automatically give it the same weight because it's from the "other side"--not when that dissenting opinion comes from one that lacks knowledge, ethics, credibility, or all of the above. This whole notion that everyone's opinion somehow has merit is utter bullshit.



    You continue to post links from people that have been proven time and time again to distort the actual picture of what's going. They use faulty math, logic, and science to advance an agenda. Their fallacious reasoning has been debunked numerous times, yet because they are from the "other side," you somehow decide that they still must receive equal weight. I'm sorry, they don't.



    It makes no fucking sense whatsoever. There is no big conspiracy. You don't understand the science.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Science is about questioning the dogma. Questioning the status quo. Questioning the consensus. Right now, you and other adherents of the AGW religion seem to think a perceived consensus means no questions should be allowed.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    It's clear who the real "deniers" are, here.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    I welcome and encourage science. Unfortunately the green movement has very little to do with science.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Hi Wormhole!



    The science should speak for itself. And I'm listening. To all of it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Declaring victory before the battle is over, eh? Go right ahead. I'm not going away. And neither are those who continue to question the status quo...unless our rights to do so are forcibly removed from us.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BR View Post


    Jazzy, you do realize though that spreading your ridiculous lies from your dubious sources completely runs counter to your goals of going green.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    I'll stop posting in this thread as soon as the science is settled.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BR View Post


    But that means you need to learn what science is first.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    Jg, most of what you have posted before your trip and after have been challenged. You have not responded to the challenges by refuting the evidence that was provided to refute your postings. You have not tried to refute or challenge what I have posted. Rather than posting more material from the same old sites, try to explain what has been challenged and challenge or refute what I've posted. Here is some of what has gone unchallenged:



    CO2



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...82#post1743082

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...97#post1743397

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...20#post1744020

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...67#post1744067





    BIODIVERSITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...00#post1743400

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...43#post1744043

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...66#post1746666



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post


    Jazzguru!



    He's been kind enough to actually make some links!



    Will you respond to his posts?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    I encourage you to challenge the originators of the content. I am merely providing links to their content for convenience.

    Trying to refute their claims here is pretty pointless.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    I'm not posting links to relevant information in here for you. You've already made up your mind.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    The problem is that the information you are posting is not relevant nor is it fact.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    The problem is that you are not interested in science.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    Actually I'm interested in science. I used SCIENCE to refute your bloggers. You have yet to respond to the links I provided to show that there is strong SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE based upon SCIENCE and FACTS that the crap you posted is bogus---where's your SCIENCE?



    When you learn the difference between science and blogger's pseudo science, post---otherwise your postings here are no longer credible. If you think they are then defend them, otherwise the DENIER'S label is appropriate.



    Try this as a starting point:



    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming
  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,297member
    FT, what does showing that we have some trolls around here who follow people from thread to thread posting their same accusations and demand prove to anyone?



    Myself and several other posters could go into a dozen threads and make some ridiculous demand of you and then draw our conclusions when you refuse to say how high to our command of jump.



    I could then compile all the folks saying that into a nice long reply.



    What does it prove though? I guess you should post it in the bullying thread as an example of internet bullying by yourself and others.



    Also height of irony, you complain about the thread moving to a new page when your long replies move it there faster than anything else.
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    Yeah, I expected that, I guess it's my fault expecting that you would actually comprehend the SCIENCE in the postings. You've been reading and putting too much faith in bloggers far too long to understand the SCIENCE.[/URL][/SIZE][/B]



    It's exactly this attitude among the American Left that caused them to get obliterated in the mid-term elections.



    You believe anyone who sees the same information you do but doesn't arrive at the same conclusions you do is stupid, misinformed, and/or ignorant.



    Obama is telling us that we didn't vote for him and the Democrats in the mid-terms because we didn't understand their message. In short, he thinks we are stupid, misinformed, and/or ignorant.



    Persist in this attitude, FT, and you will soon have a startling and likely unpleasant run-in with reality somewhere down the line, just as the Democrats did earlier this month.
  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    For fun we should just insinuate that because FT disagrees with you, he is totally uninformed on the matter and clearly is ignoring everything you've posted.



    I mean we've clearly got proof this is true because darn it, he still disagrees!



    Obviously if he knew what you knew, he would do what you do, and likewise think what you think.



    When you've got "the one true answer" all dissention and opposition is impossible.



    tm, you fail to see that most of what jg has posted has been refuted as being wrong. jg has failed to support any of his/her postings/arguements. Instead of standing for what is he/she has posted, jg goes back to the same denier's blogger sites and finds more crap.



    Try to review the following:



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...00#post1749200



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...97#post1747897



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...40#post1747840



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...47#post1747847



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...65#post1743065



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...82#post1743082



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...95#post1742595



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...18#post1739618



    STILL UNANSWERED. jg IS A DENIER WHO CAN'T STAND UP WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THE TRUTH.
  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    FT, what does showing that we have some trolls around here who follow people from thread to thread posting their same accusations and demand prove to anyone?



    Myself and several other posters could go into a dozen threads and make some ridiculous demand of you and then draw our conclusions when you refuse to say how high to our command of jump.



    I could then compile all the folks saying that into a nice long reply.



    What does it prove though? I guess you should post it in the bullying thread as an example of internet bullying by yourself and others.



    Also height of irony, you complain about the thread moving to a new page when your long replies move it there faster than anything else.



    As others have pointed out in other threads, you don't answer questions. How am I making ridiculous demands on jg? Only asking that jg to support his/her argument.



    Who has come to the thread to confront me----err who's the troll---tm of course!!!



  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    It's exactly this attitude among the American Left that caused them to get obliterated in the mid-term elections.



    False accusations--ad hominem attack. My politics aren't from the left---if it really matters. How I voted is of not your concern---we live in what I think is a free country?--so how I voted is not an issue.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    You believe anyone who sees the same information you do but doesn't arrive at the same conclusions you do is stupid, misinformed, and/or ignorant.



    When you keep going to the same blogger denier sites and post crap, what is one to think? You don't even defend what you have posted.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Obama is telling us that we didn't vote for him and the Democrats in the mid-terms because we didn't understand their message. In short, he thinks we are stupid, misinformed, and/or ignorant.



    Persist in this attitude, FT, and you will soon have a startling and likely unpleasant run-in with reality somewhere down the line, just as the Democrats did earlier this month.



  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    tm, you fail to see that most of what jg has posted has been refuted as being wrong. jg has failed to support any of his/her postings/arguements. Instead of standing for what is he/she has posted, jg goes back to the same denier's blogger sites and finds more crap.



    Try to review the following:



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...00#post1749200



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...97#post1747897



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...40#post1747840



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...47#post1747847



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...65#post1743065



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...82#post1743082



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...95#post1742595



    http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...18#post1739618



    STILL UNANSWERED. jg IS A DENIER WHO CAN'T STAND UP WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THE TRUTH.



    jg, you might want to respond to these.
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post


    False accusations--ad hominem attack. My politics aren't from the left---if it really matters. How I voted is of not your concern---we live in what I think is a free country?--so how I voted is not an issue.



    I don't believe I mentioned anything about your own political beliefs or how you voted. I compared your attitude with that of the Democrats.



    Quote:

    When you keep going to the same blogger denier sites and post crap, what is one to think? You don't even defend what you have posted.



    I don't presume to tell anyone what they should think. I prefer to provide links to information I feel is related to the climate change question, offer occasional commentary, and let people decide for themselves.



    The facts should speak for themselves, should they not?



    Yet you proceed to try to "refute" or "debunk" the information in the links and challenge me as if I am the author of the content.



    Why don't you challenge the creators of the content directly?



    Furthermore, why do you feel the need to challenge anything and everything that could possibly contradict established AGW dogma?



    Keep throwing down the gauntlet. I have no intention of playing your silly game.
  • signalsignal Posts: 37member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Follow the money: Gore Pocketed ~$18 Million from Now-Defunct Chicago Climate Exchange



    And what was the mechanism by which "Al Gore" manipulated the entire apparatus of agreed upon science to falsify vast amounts of data across decades of research in order to line his pockets? Since we're "following the money" and all.
  • finetunesfinetunes Posts: 2,065member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by signal View Post


    And what was the mechanism by which "Al Gore" manipulated the entire apparatus of agreed upon science to falsify vast amounts of data across decades of research in order to line his pockets? Since we're "following the money" and all.



    I guess you're new, don't expect an answer any time soon. Maybe if you're lucky jg will post a link to something totally irrelevant and off point.
Sign In or Register to comment.