"global warming petition project" peer reviewed and everything???

[Padawanbater2]

You think solving a case for a jury is the same a proving a case scientifically? No wonder you are so confused.

No, I was illustrating the idea that you don't need to have seen something first hand to prove it

Do you think that nothing in science can be proven without seeing it firsthand first?

No. You are lying when you say this.

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm

All the scant evidence points to Evolutionary process in species and selection, etc. And there is no other evidence at
present to say, this is not the way it is.

Are you saying the only thing that proves the theory of evolution is that we don't have anything better?

That is the opposite of AGW and though I explain it chapter and verse, it is obvious already embrace the Lie and are blind.

That's the opposite of ACC?

Credentials? A lot more than your none. And that is the Fact.

OK, so what are they?

 

[Doer]

No, I was illustrating the idea that you don't need to have seen something first hand to prove it

Do you think that nothing in science can be proven without seeing it firsthand first?



https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm



Are you saying the only thing that proves the theory of evolution is that we don't have anything better?



That's the opposite of ACC?



OK, so what are they?

1) I will match resumes with you. And pay checks. But, I can't think of a suitable penalty.

2) I don't care for your mealy mouth, horse ass approach, and I have nothing to prove to you.

3) Are you saying if there was other evidence to contradict Evolution, we would not be disputing Evolution in Science? You are just too dumb about this.

4) Are you saying because we dig up a very incomplete set of bone clues, that proves Anything? You don't realize, that we simply don't have a Current Contradiction to the Current Understanding of Evolution? If we had one we would Contradict. Science is not belief and recant.

You are not even an adult thinker. You think a political poll is the same as the rigors of science.
You think we can't find something tomorrow, that sets Evolution's face in the mud.
You want to challenge me for what would be evidence of Actual Warming, (not even AGW) and never say a word, that I did.

Yet, you cannot come up with a sliver of actual evidence that Woman is warming the planet.

You are not up for this. Not but blind and ignorant about it all. HA Haaaaaa.

 

[NLXSK1]

• You are misrepresenting the fact that there is a near universal agreement on the scientific consensus of ACC. You are either purposefully lying when you say there is no current understanding or you're willfully ignorant of that fact​
  
  
  
  

You are purposely lying if you continue to attempt to use this cherry picked piece of shit unscientific questionnaire that proves that most scientist agree it exists. It does not show that they think it is a problem, that they think man can do anything about it, nor if they think man should.

New information just came out where scientists admit that if we eliminated CO2 emissions it would not stop global warming... LOL!!! An exact example of why doing anything is often worse than doing nothing...

 

[jahbrudda]

It's funny what age and experience did to me.
When I was young, I was dumb enough to think I knew everything.
Now that I'm older. I'm intelligent enough to understand that I don't know a fraction of what of thought I did..

 

[Doer]

It's funny what age and experience did to me.
When I was young, I was dumb enough to think I knew everything.
Now that I'm older. I'm intelligent enough to understand that I don't know a fraction of what of thought I did..

Truth brother. And that is on a daily basis for me.

 

[Wavels]

Yes indeed, the old maxim that youth is wasted on the young is apropos.

If I only knew then what I know now.

We get too soon old and too late smart.

puff, puff...exhale...ahhhh, ain't life grand?

 

[MuyLocoNC]

I don't want any government action to limit GHG emissions

Now what would you accept as undeniable proof of anthropogenic climate change?

While I don't believe it for one red hot second, a deals a deal.

Very simple actually. I would need undeniable evidence that we are warming faster than any other time in the planet's recent history. How about a quarter of its accepted age, a billion years. Once that is proven, I would need undeniable evidence that man is the ONLY POSSIBLE explanation for the phenomenon.

Yup, that would pretty much do it. Comparisons going back 180 years, 10,000 years, a million years...meaningless. Honestly, I should demand 2 billion years, but I want to be fair.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

New information just came out where scientists admit that if we eliminated CO2 emissions it would not stop global warming... LOL!!! An exact example of why doing anything is often worse than doing nothing...

RFK Jr stated something to that effect around 5-6 years ago. Saw the video on Beck, if I remember correctly.

 

[ginwilly]

Yes indeed, the old maxim that youth is wasted on the young is apropos.

If I only knew then what I know now.

We get too soon old and too late smart.

puff, puff...exhale...ahhhh, ain't life grand?

I just wish I knew half what I THOUGHT I knew back then.

Dad was right...... damnit.

 

[Doer]

Damnit.....!!!!

 

[Padawanbater2]

1) I will match resumes with you. And pay checks. But, I can't think of a suitable penalty.

Why don't you feel comfortable sharing your credentials after espousing how important they are? That seems a little unusual to me.. \

2) I don't care for your mealy mouth, horse ass approach, and I have nothing to prove to you.

Do you think that nothing in science can be proven without seeing it firsthand first?

3) Are you saying if there was other evidence to contradict Evolution, we would not be disputing Evolution in Science? You are just too dumb about this.

Besides the fact that there is no other viable theory to compete with the theory of evolution, what do you believe proves its validity?

4) Are you saying because we dig up a very incomplete set of bone clues, that proves Anything?

If we dug up a very incomplete set of bones, that might say something. The fact that we've dug up dozens of sets of complete bones means the theory of evolution is a fact. Humans came from less complex organisms, those organisms came from less complex organisms and so on until the beginning of life with the first organisms. Disputing this at this point is tantamount to disputing human babies come from intercourse

You don't realize, that we simply don't have a Current Contradiction to the Current Understanding of Evolution?

You don't realize that we simply don't NEED a current contradiction to the current understanding of the theory of evolution to conclude the theory of evolution is a scientific fact?

If we had one we would Contradict. Science is not belief and recant.

If you had one...

You are not even an adult thinker. You think a political poll is the same as the rigors of science.

No I don't

You think we can't find something tomorrow, that sets Evolution's face in the mud.
You want to challenge me for what would be evidence of Actual Warming, (not even AGW) and never say a word, that I did.

If you found a rabbit below a dinosaur in the strata TOMORROW it would totally disprove the theory of evolution.

What would you accept as proof of ACC?

Yet, you cannot come up with a sliver of actual evidence that Woman is warming the planet.

...

Very simple actually. I would need undeniable evidence that we are warming faster than any other time in the planet's recent history. How about a quarter of its accepted age, a billion years.

..What would you accept as undeniable evidence of the planet warming faster now than at any other time in the planets recent history?

Once that is proven, I would need undeniable evidence that man is the ONLY POSSIBLE explanation for the phenomenon.

..What would you accept as undeniable evidence that man is the ONLY POSSIBLE explanation for the phenomenon?

Yup, that would pretty much do it. Comparisons going back 180 years, 10,000 years, a million years...meaningless. Honestly, I should demand 2 billion years, but I want to be fair.

So 2 billion years of measurement is the only thing you would accept?

You are purposely lying if you continue to attempt to use this cherry picked piece of shit unscientific questionnaire that proves that most scientist agree it exists. It does not show that they think it is a problem, that they think man can do anything about it, nor if they think man should.

Cite it

New information just came out where scientists admit that if we eliminated CO2 emissions it would not stop global warming... LOL!!! An exact example of why doing anything is often worse than doing nothing...

What "scientists"?

CITE IT

 

[twostrokenut]

OMFG "polling for rice bowls" now there's bong water on the carpet, thanks.

 

[UncleBuck]

Wow, now it's up to 18 points from 7 then 10 then 11, now 18. The lie just keeps growing.

you are so stupid that you can't even remember how stupid you are.

Pew Research center has Romney ahead 49-45, it's closer to 54-40. Yup, that sounds about right.

do try to keep better track of your lies.

you can't handle simple science, try getting better at that before moving onto complex science.

 

[UncleBuck]

Here is something for you to chew on Padwan..

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/17736-no-proof-of-man-made-climate-change-says-greenpeace-co-founder

Greenpeace co-founder admits Global warming is a Hoax...

you are aware that he works for nuclear energy and rain forest deforesters, right?

 

[UncleBuck]

It's funny what age and experience did to me.
When I was young, I was dumb enough to think I knew everything.
Now that I'm older. I'm intelligent enough to understand that I don't know a fraction of what of thought I did..

you don't have to be very old to see how stupid you are, even retarded children can tell how stupid you are.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

you are so stupid that you can't even remember how stupid you are.



do try to keep better track of your lies.

you can't handle simple science, try getting better at that before moving onto complex science.

You do realize the date is observable on that quote, right? October 9th, isn't November 6th is it? You can't PROVE my statement is wrong. Certainly not by comparing to results almost a month later. Nice try...FAIL.

Hannity clown shoes say what?

 

[UncleBuck]

You do realize the date is observable on that quote, right? October 9th, isn't November 6th is it? You can't PROVE my statement is wrong. Certainly not by comparing to results almost a month later. Nice try...FAIL.

Hannity clown shoes say what?

only off by 18 points there.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

..What would you accept as undeniable evidence of the planet warming faster now than at any other time in the planets recent history?



..What would you accept as undeniable evidence that man is the ONLY POSSIBLE explanation for the phenomenon?


So 2 billion years of measurement is the only thing you would accept?

1. UNDENIABLE evidence
2. UNDENIABLE evidence
3. Nah, I said 1 billion. I'll stick to that.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

only off by 18 points there.

Prove I was off by 18 points on Oct 9th. Not other polls...proof.

 

[UncleBuck]

Prove I was off by 18 points on Oct 9th.

i hope you will accept nate silver as proof, since he always predicts these things using science and math.

much like with the global warming debate, you make stupid claims against science and math and get proven wrong over and over.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/09/oct-9-romney-erases-obamas-convention-bounce-in-forecast/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

here is what nate silver had to say about the election on the ninth of october of 2012.

Mr. Obama’s projected margin of victory in the national popular vote — 2.0 percentage points — represents the closest the race has been since June 27.

nate silver also got it wrong, just like you.

he got it wrong by 2 points, you had it wrong by 18 full points.

now since i suck with percentages and zeroes, you tell me: were you 900% wrong, or were you 9000% wrong? or were you 9 million times wrong?

in any case, this is the type of reality bitch slap that is occurring in the anthropogenic climate change debate, and you are the one off by 18 points while we may be off by just a couple.

be proud of your demonstrable wrongness.