Originally posted by Metal Brain "I believe we have already shown you a relevant link a long time back."
No, you have not and you are fully aware that you have not. You are the perfect axample of how GW alarists can be liars simply in an attempt to save face.
Climate models are only as good as the input from people that amount to opinions. Nobody can agree on how clouds affect out ...[text shortened]... u are simply making crap up as you go along. That is why you never have a source of information.
You really need to actually read the posts before shouting your mouth off and taking quotes out of context.
Read the rest of my post, including what I actually said about clouds in the actual context, and come back to us.
Originally posted by DeepThought but not others (e.g. your point about clouds).
that wasn't his point but mine but which he then twisted out of context. I have little doubt that he had and still has complete ignorance about computer simulations of clouds and merely obtusely took what I said in my post to him and twisted it out of context like he does for most of my quotes just like he does for quotes from other posters.
I would be surprised if he hasn't already taken some of your quotes out of context in which case you may have noticed.
He simply doesn't what talking about while we (including you ), generally have a far better idea of what we are talking about.
I have computer and physics qualifications and I can tell you some of the things he implies (not "says" because he likes to be a bit vague to hide his complete ignorance of what he shouts about ) is just complete nonsense.
Originally posted by humy that wasn't his point but mine but which he then twisted out of context. I have little doubt that he had and still has complete ignorance about computer simulations of clouds and merely obtusely took what I said in my post to him and twisted it out of context like he does for most of my quotes just like he does for quotes from other posters.
I would be surpri ...[text shortened]... a bit vague to hide his complete ignorance of what he shouts about ) is just complete nonsense.
Originally posted by sonhouse The latest word is the alarmists as you call them, are 100% correct. It is people like you who will set things up in such a way as to make for extremely difficult decisions to be made in a few decades, our grandchildren's grandchildren will be paying for the deniers goings on now.
I suppose you think the current change in our climate, glaciers melting, r ...[text shortened]... now EVERYTHING about the climate and what is causing the present change.
Is that about right?
"The latest word is the alarmists as you call them, are 100% correct. It is people like you who will set things up in such a way as to make for extremely difficult decisions to be made in a few decades, our grandchildren's grandchildren will be paying for the deniers goings on now."
Originally posted by Metal Brain "The latest word is the alarmists as you call them, are 100% correct. It is people like you who will set things up in such a way as to make for extremely difficult decisions to be made in a few decades, our grandchildren's grandchildren will be paying for the deniers goings on now."
Do you admit to being an alarmist now?
Time will tell. There are already bad things happening and not just to humans. You would just sit on your butt doing nothing while the scientific community is saying if you do X,Y and Z things will turn around.
Personally I don't want to see Polar bears go extinct because there is no ice for them, it's already looking like that will be the result.
You are just being blinded by your apologist buddies who have a vested interest in the status quo, that is to say, keep the status quo as long as THEY are alive, ukfay the grandchildren.
Originally posted by sonhouse Time will tell. There are already bad things happening and not just to humans. You would just sit on your butt doing nothing while the scientific community is saying if you do X,Y and Z things will turn around.
Personally I don't want to see Polar bears go extinct because there is no ice for them, it's already looking like that will be the result.
You ...[text shortened]... tus quo, that is to say, keep the status quo as long as THEY are alive, ukfay the grandchildren.
You said the alarmists were 100% right. That makes you an alarmist. It doesn't get more obvious. You are the true denialist.
Originally posted by Metal Brain You said the alarmists were 100% right. That makes you an alarmist. It doesn't get more obvious. You are the true denialist.
And if you are wrong? Will you be able to face that in the years to come? Or will you see the coming deterioration of the climate just the natural order of things, shrugging your shoulders and going inside for another beer?
Originally posted by sonhouse And if you are wrong? Will you be able to face that in the years to come? Or will you see the coming deterioration of the climate just the natural order of things, shrugging your shoulders and going inside for another beer?
Deterioration? Why do you use that word?
It is called climate change, not climate deterioration. Change is part of life. Life evolves to adapt to change. It will continue to do so.
Why would I go inside for a beer? Because it is raining a lot?
Originally posted by Metal Brain Deterioration? Why do you use that word?
It is called climate change, not climate deterioration. Change is part of life. Life evolves to adapt to change. It will continue to do so.
Why would I go inside for a beer? Because it is raining a lot?
The deterioration part is what the changing climate does to the planet.
Look at my post about waves breaking up Arctic ice. Coastlines all around the Arctic will pay the price in several ways, like erosion of beaches, release of more CO2 and methane from what was permafrost.
Climate change denier paid by energy companies:
01 Mar '15 08:053 edits
Back to Top