Climategate: Associated Press, busted!

Originally posted by zeeblebot
how does that make our contribution significant?

It doesn't. It's a completely irrelevant point that you brought up.
Do you honestly think that scientists haven't taken natural cycles into consideration?

Answer this: Have you read any of the IPCC report?

Originally posted by zeeblebot
the point in question is, what does USA_PT mean by "many"? the same as kindergarteners counting on their fingers (six, seven, ten, eleven)? or more than that? after you provide a number, then you can demonstrate whether your position re the quantity is correct or not.

LOL!

Why does it matter how many times you've contradicted yourself? This is a horrible dodge attempt.

Fact: You've posted and defended editorials claiming global warming IS happening but humans aren't the cause.

Fact: You've posted and defended editorials claiming global warming is NOT happening.

Fact: Both cannot be true; therefore, you have contradicted yourself.

if i remember mr stabby's argument right, i did cut-and-paste something that supported the idea of global warming. i went back and looked, after his post, and noted that my point in posting it was to note that global warming has occurred in the distant past WITHOUT the presence of industry.

This is your statement.
Back it up.

Originally posted by mrstabby
It doesn't. It's a completely irrelevant point that you brought up.
Do you honestly think that scientists haven't taken natural cycles into consideration?

Answer this: Have you read any of the IPCC report?

if our contribution is not significant, it's completely useless or nostalgic to spend $45 trillion (initial estimate!) on remediation and research to reverse the effects of our not-significant contribution.

no, and i don't plan to. enough people say it's crap.

Originally posted by mrstabby

if i remember mr stabby's argument right, i did cut-and-paste something that supported the idea of global warming. i went back and looked, after his post, and noted that my point in posting it was to note that global warming has occurred in the distant past WITHOUT the presence of industry.

This is your statement.
Back it up.

back up what?

Originally posted by mrstabby
Have you read any of the IPCC report?

Originally posted by zeeblebot
no, and i don't plan to. enough people say it's crap.

And there we have it, zeeblebotism in a nutshell.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
LOL!

Why does it matter how many times you've contradicted yourself? This is a horrible dodge attempt.

Fact: You've posted and defended editorials claiming global warming IS happening but humans aren't the cause.

Fact: You've posted and defended editorials claiming global warming is NOT happening.

Fact: Both cannot be true; therefore, you have contradicted yourself.

YOU said "many". provide numbers and instances so we can see what you mean by "many".

as far as what you see as a contradiction: posting a sentence with a particular opinion embedded in a fragment of an article is not an endorsement of the opinion.

show where i've posted and defended both positions.

i think the temp is nudging up and down year to year. it is not sky-high. it is not tracking al gore's stepstool graph. the climate data and analyses are being fudged. we don't need to spend trillions on research and remediation. we do need to examine the data and methods of the climatologists more closely and independently.

Originally posted by FMF
And there we have it, zeeblebotism in a nutshell.

i tell you what. you're the one who says it's gold. it's your reference. why don't you READ it to us?

why don't you start by telling us what it includes of the dissenting opinion?

----

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_Panel_on_Climate_Change

# 2 IPCC Assessment Reports

* 2.1 IPCC First Assessment Report: 1990
* 2.2 IPCC Supplementary Report: 1992
* 2.3 IPCC Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995
o 2.3.1 Debate
o 2.3.2 Debate over value of a statistical life
* 2.4 IPCC Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001
o 2.4.1 Economic growth estimates debate
o 2.4.2 Physical modeling debate
* 2.5 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007
* 2.6 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2014
* 2.7 IPCC Methodology Reports
o 2.7.1 Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
o 2.7.2 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories