★ Have you made up your mind on climate change, yet?
- Thread starter Ceiling Cat
- Start date
Hey weasel, the chart I've used for every post is the exact same one as you picked for the bet:
Every time I've said this is the source for the chart:
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
Its you that is trying to 'move the goal posts' by insisting we use a different chart:
You are the one that's not using the chart you picked for the bet, you are the one acting like a weasel.
Time for a look at those same quotes as intended, not the 'weasel dick out of context' versions.
The full quotes say nothing of what you insinuate, as usual.
Weasels will be weasels.
As stated, the full quotes show you are full of weasel shit.
Now lets look at the quotes you dishonestly took out of context:
Why are you continuing to post those quotes when the full quotes show you are a weasel?
Why won't you admit you lost the bet?
This was the bet:
0.87ºC
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/t
You lost the bet.
Time to pay up.
Stop being a weasel.
You lost the bet.
As loser you must buy these two books, read them and review them here:
http://www.amazon.ca/The-Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars/dp/0231152558
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/05...=as2&tag=grlasbl0a-20&linkId=F7NQQFQ4THAO2JDE
Now lets look at the quotes you dishonestly took out of context:
Why are you continuing to post those quotes when the full quotes show you are a weasel?
Why won't you admit you lost the bet?
This was the bet:
Click on the link in the bet above to see who won the bet!
0.87ºC
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/t
You lost the bet.
Time to pay up.
Stop being a weasel.
You lost the bet.
As loser you must buy these two books, read them and review them here:
http://www.amazon.ca/The-Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars/dp/0231152558
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/05...=as2&tag=grlasbl0a-20&linkId=F7NQQFQ4THAO2JDE
Moviefan is still up to his weasel tricks.
Sigh.
The Six attempts at 'Moving the Goal Posts' of Moviefan:
#1 - 0.86ºC
#3 - 0.89ºC
Sigh.
The Six attempts at 'Moving the Goal Posts' of Moviefan:
#1 - 0.86ºC
#2 - 0.766ºC
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...made-up-your-mind-on-climate-change-yet/page8
#3 - 0.89ºC
#4 - 0.745ºC and 0.85ºC in the same bad post
#5 - Trying to replace the chart specified in the bet with a different chart at a different web address.
Once again, showing that the quotes repeated yet again do not say what moviefan insinuates they do.
Moviefan continues to act like a weasel, now repeatedly pasting in out of context quotes despite being repeatedly shown that the full quotes only expose more of his weasel act.
As stated, the full quotes from post #210 show you are full of weasel shit.
Now lets look at the quotes you dishonestly took out of context:
Why are you continuing to post those quotes when the full quotes show you are a weasel?
Why won't you admit you lost the bet?
This was the bet:
Click on the link in the bet above to see who won the bet!
0.87ºC
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/t
You lost the bet.
Time to pay up.
Stop being a weasel.
You lost the bet.
As loser you must buy these two books, read them and review them here:
http://www.amazon.ca/The-Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars/dp/0231152558
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/05...=as2&tag=grlasbl0a-20&linkId=F7NQQFQ4THAO2JDE
You would think that its incredibly easy to find and state what NASA found as the global anomaly for 2015.
All you need to do is click on the link below and read the number NASA found, 0.87ºC.
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/t
And yet moviefan has tried and four times he comes up with the wrong number, each time it goes through a little weird denier math and each time it comes out different.
Such is the life of a science denier, incapable of even the most basic math.
Lets look once again at the 6 total failure for moviefan to find the 2015 anomaly and apply it to our bet. And once again for reference the bet was on 2015's global anomaly hitting 0.83ºC according to NASA.
The Six attempts at 'Moving the Goal Posts' of Moviefan:
#1 - 0.86ºC
#3 - 0.89ºC
#6 Deliberate use of quotes out of context.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...e-change-yet&p=5475426&viewfull=1#post5475426
All you need to do is click on the link below and read the number NASA found, 0.87ºC.
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/t
And yet moviefan has tried and four times he comes up with the wrong number, each time it goes through a little weird denier math and each time it comes out different.
Such is the life of a science denier, incapable of even the most basic math.
Lets look once again at the 6 total failure for moviefan to find the 2015 anomaly and apply it to our bet. And once again for reference the bet was on 2015's global anomaly hitting 0.83ºC according to NASA.
The Six attempts at 'Moving the Goal Posts' of Moviefan:
#1 - 0.86ºC
#2 - 0.766ºC
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...made-up-your-mind-on-climate-change-yet/page8
#3 - 0.89ºC
#4 - 0.745ºC and 0.85ºC in the same bad post
#5 - Trying to replace the chart specified in the bet with a different chart at a different web address.
#6 Deliberate use of quotes out of context.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...e-change-yet&p=5475426&viewfull=1#post5475426
Moviefan continues to lie and continues to act like a weasel.
His credibility is as low as his ability to judge real science from propaganda.
wattsupwiththat.com
A conspiracy theory filled cesspool of nonsense articles with no research and zero credibility.
Just like moviefan.
Moviefan, you lost the bet.
You lost.
Stop acting like a weasel and admit it.
His credibility is as low as his ability to judge real science from propaganda.
And who does he turn to after accusing NASA, AAAS, NOAA and the IPCC of 'bastardizing science'?
wattsupwiththat.com
A conspiracy theory filled cesspool of nonsense articles with no research and zero credibility.
Just like moviefan.
Moviefan, you lost the bet.
The anomaly for 2015 is 0.87ºC.
You lost.
Stop acting like a weasel and admit it.
The title of this thread sparked my interest, but what has transpired here with the betting and the figures seem irrelevant to the intended discussion. Maybe it did, I am not sure.
I would love to get this discussion back on track. Agree this is a "climate" discussion, not a "weather" discussion. I think you should boil it down to the facts. Fact is that we continue to burn fossil fuels, which, if you know the science, are basically materials that trapped carbon on earth from millions of years ago that helped "cool" the earth down and allowed for plants, animals and human lives of today to begin and sustain. So now we are slowly but surely releasing them back into the atmosphere, and at some point we are going to hit that threshold where the temperature becomes deadly to life.
So in the interest of steering this discussion back on course - I do agree that global warming is a serious challenge. It's not an overwhelming or impossible challenge, but t this point, I believe it needs to be attacked from two fronts. Reduce the rate of release of Carbon into the air (the most obvious solution is to reduce the burning of fossil fuels, vehicle emission is the biggest offender in North America), and reduce the amount of Carbon already in the air (one of the simplest way is to plant more trees - they consume carbon to grow).
So with that said, does anyone think otherwise? Is the climate change trivial?
I would love to get this discussion back on track. Agree this is a "climate" discussion, not a "weather" discussion. I think you should boil it down to the facts. Fact is that we continue to burn fossil fuels, which, if you know the science, are basically materials that trapped carbon on earth from millions of years ago that helped "cool" the earth down and allowed for plants, animals and human lives of today to begin and sustain. So now we are slowly but surely releasing them back into the atmosphere, and at some point we are going to hit that threshold where the temperature becomes deadly to life.
So in the interest of steering this discussion back on course - I do agree that global warming is a serious challenge. It's not an overwhelming or impossible challenge, but t this point, I believe it needs to be attacked from two fronts. Reduce the rate of release of Carbon into the air (the most obvious solution is to reduce the burning of fossil fuels, vehicle emission is the biggest offender in North America), and reduce the amount of Carbon already in the air (one of the simplest way is to plant more trees - they consume carbon to grow).
So with that said, does anyone think otherwise? Is the climate change trivial?
As would we all.
Unfortunately, Crybaby Frankfooter insists on carrying on his two-month-long temper tantrum (the bet was settled back in December). And even when you let him get in the last word (as was the case in at least three other threads), he insists on resurrecting the debate about the bet, as if it's going to change people's minds.
Anyway, my own view is that I think too much of the global-warming agenda is driven by politics, rather than science.
To cite one example, when the United Nations' International Panel on Climate Change released its fifth report in 2013, the Summary for Policy Makers (the part that the politicians read) was heavily slanted towards trying to defend the case for man-made global warming when the recorded evidence showed the predictions of how man-made greenhouse gases would affect the Earth's climate were spectacularly wrong.
That's advocacy, not science. Real scientists would accept that the results were not what was expected and go forward from there, rather than going all out to defend a position that was established by politicians (the IPCC's bosses).
There is merit in reducing our use of coal-fired plants and exploring more effective ways to produce energy. But it should be done in a responsible and serious manner, not advanced through dubious claims that the world is on the edge of the apocalypse.
My two cents.
You lost the bet then, true.
Since then you've just tried to cheat, lie and generally act like a denier weasel.
You still can't accept that 0.87 is higher then 0.83, can you?
Now you are out and out lying.
As you stated before:
As you know from the bet, the global anomaly was posted at NASA as 0.87ºC, which makes those projections quite accurate.
Reducing the amount of carbon we are putting into the atmosphere is the best option. Planting trees is a great idea until you look at the scale of the problem. Where is there land available where we could plant that many more trees? How many more trees would be necessary to bring down CO2 levels?
The change isn't trivial. Extreme weather is causing billions in damages as well as crop failures. Ocean acidification is a major threat to coral reefs and shellfish, which is a major threat to ocean fisheries. Those are issues today. CBC had an article recently that noted that the amount of ice melting from Greenland has resulted in measurable changes to Earth's gravity. Not to mention the very large likelihood that same ice melt has added enough fresh water into the North Atlantic to slow down the AMOC, which may be responsible for the last two incredibly cold winters in Eastern Canada while the rest of the globe experienced record warmth.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north...ulation-earth-s-gravitational-field-1.3437904
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/
That is the kind of evidence that should sway even the deniers, but....
Yes, and no matter what we here in Canada do it has no impact on global GHG emissions. We account for less than 2% of the carbon dioxide produced. So no matter how hard both Kathleen Wynne and Tinkerbell hit themselves in the forehead with a hammer it will have no effect other than making our lives more expensive.....then again, their climate change policies have nothing to do with climate change and everything to do with siphoning more money out of our pockets and using the moral high road of "wanting to do our part in fighting climate change". When China, India, Russia, The U.S. And others make meaningful cuts then we too should follow suit. Until then it's utterly pointless.
