Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby huntmmup » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:17 am

From November 2012 through December 2013, 2,258 peer-reviewed climate articles by 9,136 authors agreed that global warming is manmade.

In that same time period, 1 author published 1 paper that disagreed.

http://www.weather.com/news/science/env ... g-20140122


Whether 9000 scientists are liars and 1 is telling the truth, or whether 9000 really believe they are right and just getting the science wrong doesnt matter to me. I am saying, we should do practical things to lower greenhouse gas emissions so just in case the 9000 are right, we won't screw the planet up for our kids and grandkids.
huntmmup
hunter
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:27 pm


Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby go get the bird » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:31 am

You really are butthurt, aren't you?
MackieKnife wrote:The moral of the story is...I'm retarded.
User avatar
go get the bird
hunter
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:12 pm

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby huntmmup » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:38 am

What is this butthurt term? Is it supposed to be funny or demeaning? It makes you sound like a child. You said explicitly that we should only trust the experts on subjects, well here you go all but 1 of the experts agree.
huntmmup
hunter
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:27 pm

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Apr 24, 2014 1:11 pm

huntmmup wrote:What is this butthurt term? Is it supposed to be funny or demeaning? It makes you sound like a child. You said explicitly that we should only trust the experts on subjects, well here you go all but 1 of the experts agree.


Yep, totally butt hurt. His dream of the great lie is dying. Anyone who has ever dealt with science knows full well that no one agrees 99% on anything. Only a moronic fool believes they would or can. Science simply doesn't work that way.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6703
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Rat Creek » Thu Apr 24, 2014 1:29 pm

Rule Number 1. Follow the money.
Rule Number 2. See Rule Number 1.

Is there more money in (1) grants and professorships associated with human caused global warming or (2) it warms, it cools, and we cannot control it.

Why else would 90,000 liberal activists write papers and then pat each other on the back by "peer" reviewing each other. :lol3:

And by the way, there are many scientists who have and are calling BS on all those so-called peer reviewed papers. But they have real lives and their well being is not dependent upon the hoax. Besides, we do have freedom of religion, so the Church of Global Warming should be able to practice their faith just like any other religious order. :bow: :bow: :bow:
Rat Creek
Rat Creek
hunter
 
Posts: 4535
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Andy W » Thu Apr 24, 2014 1:57 pm

Rat Creek wrote:Besides, we do have freedom of religion, so the Church of Global Warming should be able to practice their faith just like any other religious order.

Except that other cults don't force you to join them or pay for their nonsense.
Andy W
hunter
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:30 am
Location: KY

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby dudejcb » Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:27 pm

go get the bird wrote:You really are butthurt, aren't you?
Who's the butt hurt one?
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5254
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Rat Creek » Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:40 pm

Andy W wrote:
Rat Creek wrote:Besides, we do have freedom of religion, so the Church of Global Warming should be able to practice their faith just like any other religious order.

Except that other cults don't force you to join them or pay for their nonsense.


Ah yes. Good point. One type allows freedom of association, the other type employs jackbooted thugs to force compliance to Gaia. :rolleyes:
Rat Creek
Rat Creek
hunter
 
Posts: 4535
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby go get the bird » Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:41 pm

dudejcb wrote:
go get the bird wrote:You really are butthurt, aren't you?
Who's the butt hurt one?

:huh:
MackieKnife wrote:The moral of the story is...I'm retarded.
User avatar
go get the bird
hunter
 
Posts: 3426
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:12 pm

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby SpinnerMan » Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:47 pm

Is there warming greater than 0.0000000000000000000001 degrees because of man's activity? Yep, that should be 9,000 to 1.

It's the doomsdayers that don't have the definite scientific support.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.

:lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3:

There are many whackjob predictions like this. What is the consensus on them? Why do you trust people that made predictions that have proven so wrong or the people that did not try to debunk this fear mongering?

There is a huge difference between some warming even if negligible and catastrophic global warming. The idiot warmers act like any warming no matter how small proves catastrophic consequences will ensue and anyone that denies certainty of catastrophe are denying that CO2 impedes the transport of infrared radiation through the atmosphere, so there is some possibly negligible warming as a result of higher concentrations.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby boney fingers » Thu Apr 24, 2014 6:59 pm

Its almost May and the my cattle are still not out on grass. Ive had them out as soon as the first week in April and no later than third week in the past 20 years; looks like it will be May before they are out. I wish it were true.
boney fingers
hunter
 
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:30 pm

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Rhock19 » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:11 pm

Global cooling over our last wisconsin winter. -20 plus wind chill for weeks, im not buying it
User avatar
Rhock19
hunter
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:19 pm
Location: WI

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Indaswamp » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:15 pm

Rat Creek wrote:Rule Number 1. Follow the money.
Rule Number 2. See Rule Number 1.

Is there more money in (1) grants and professorships associated with human caused global warming or (2) it warms, it cools, and we cannot control it.

Why else would 90,000 liberal activists write papers and then pat each other on the back by "peer" reviewing each other. :lol3:

And by the way, there are many scientists who have and are calling BS on all those so-called peer reviewed papers. But they have real lives and their well being is not dependent upon the hoax. Besides, we do have freedom of religion, so the Church of Global Warming should be able to practice their faith just like any other religious order. :bow: :bow: :bow:

dhunt does not understand how grant money works rat.... follow the propaganda.... :wink:
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Never fart in your waders, it'll give you WORTS.
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 58136
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Indaswamp » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:19 pm

Andy W wrote:
Rat Creek wrote:Besides, we do have freedom of religion, so the Church of Global Warming should be able to practice their faith just like any other religious order.

Except that other cults don't force you to join them or pay for their nonsense.


*****See the jyiza tax in Islam......
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Never fart in your waders, it'll give you WORTS.
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 58136
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby dudejcb » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:23 pm

Rhock19 wrote:Global cooling over our last wisconsin winter. -20 plus wind chill for weeks, im not buying it
It can be confusing ... or dynamic. Some of my family members wonder if I'll ever move back to Wisco. Prolly not.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5254
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby dudejcb » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:25 pm

Indaswamp wrote:
Rat Creek wrote:Rule Number 1. Follow the money.
Rule Number 2. See Rule Number 1.

Is there more money in (1) grants and professorships associated with human caused global warming or (2) it warms, it cools, and we cannot control it.

Why else would 90,000 liberal activists write papers and then pat each other on the back by "peer" reviewing each other. :lol3:

And by the way, there are many scientists who have and are calling BS on all those so-called peer reviewed papers. But they have real lives and their well being is not dependent upon the hoax. Besides, we do have freedom of religion, so the Church of Global Warming should be able to practice their faith just like any other religious order. :bow: :bow: :bow:

dhunt does not understand how grant money works rat.... follow the propaganda.... :wink:
I've written proposals and received a few federal grants, and I was a Smart Grid merit reviewer for three FOA's for DOE. Do you guys know how they work?
Last edited by dudejcb on Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5254
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:28 pm

dudejcb wrote:
Indaswamp wrote:
Rat Creek wrote:Rule Number 1. Follow the money.
Rule Number 2. See Rule Number 1.

Is there more money in (1) grants and professorships associated with human caused global warming or (2) it warms, it cools, and we cannot control it.

Why else would 90,000 liberal activists write papers and then pat each other on the back by "peer" reviewing each other. :lol3:

And by the way, there are many scientists who have and are calling BS on all those so-called peer reviewed papers. But they have real lives and their well being is not dependent upon the hoax. Besides, we do have freedom of religion, so the Church of Global Warming should be able to practice their faith just like any other religious order. :bow: :bow: :bow:

dhunt does not understand how grant money works rat.... follow the propaganda.... :wink:
I've written proposals and received a few federal grants; do you guys know how they work?



Yes & Yes. Been there done that.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6703
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Nabs » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:34 pm

They came "Oh so close" to matching Kim Jong Il's perfect election results, how could you argue against anything so perfectly accepted.

Put 5 people in a room and ask them what color the sky is and you will get 6 different answers all of which are false.
User avatar
Nabs
hunter
 
Posts: 745
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:35 pm

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Indaswamp » Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:05 am

Nabs wrote:They came "Oh so close" to matching Kim Jong Il's perfect election results, how could you argue against anything so perfectly accepted.

Put 5 people in a room and ask them what color the sky is and you will get 6 different answers all of which are false.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :censored: :censored: that was funny!!!

1000 points to Nabs!!! :lol3: :lol3: :clapping: :clapping:
The Cajun 7 Course Meal; 1 lb. of boudin and a six pack of Abita beer.

Save the Marsh, Eat a Nutria!

Never fart in your waders, it'll give you WORTS.
User avatar
Indaswamp
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 58136
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South Louisiana

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby clampdaddy » Fri Apr 25, 2014 6:13 am

:thumbsup:
Indaswamp wrote:
Nabs wrote:They came "Oh so close" to matching Kim Jong Il's perfect election results, how could you argue against anything so perfectly accepted.

Put 5 people in a room and ask them what color the sky is and you will get 6 different answers all of which are false.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :censored: :censored: that was funny!!!

1000 points to Nabs!!! :lol3: :lol3: :clapping: :clapping:

:thumbsup:
User avatar
clampdaddy
hunter
 
Posts: 3658
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Where spoonies go to die

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri Apr 25, 2014 6:31 am

Maybe the 9,136 vs. 1 are the 9,136 different sets of predictions about the impact of CO2.

They agree on trivialities and then people that don't understand assume that means catastrophe will ensue and we must empower some world government to save us all.

Which one of those models is the one that all 9,136 agree is correct?

Image
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby Gunnysway » Fri Apr 25, 2014 6:46 am

SpinnerMan wrote:Maybe the 9,136 vs. 1 are the 9,136 different sets of predictions about the impact of CO2.

They agree on trivialities and then people that don't understand assume that means catastrophe will ensue and we must empower some world government to save us all.

Which one of those models is the one that all 9,136 agree is correct?

Image




The worst one.... Duh... :fingerhead:



:grooving:
Setting up meetings between geese and God since 1992...

Gud till ära, oss till gagn...
User avatar
Gunnysway
hunter
 
Posts: 3194
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 11:46 am
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby huntmmup » Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:10 am

SpinnerMan instead of sounding stupid, why not learn a little about science? Read the article. All of those authors agree that the warming is caused primarily by man. They do not agree on the very complicated scientific models used to predict what will happen as we keep putting more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, thats what they are all studying and publishing articles about.
huntmmup
hunter
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:27 pm

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby huntmmup » Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:29 am

ScaupHunter wrote:
huntmmup wrote:What is this butthurt term? Is it supposed to be funny or demeaning? It makes you sound like a child. You said explicitly that we should only trust the experts on subjects, well here you go all but 1 of the experts agree.


Yep, totally butt hurt. His dream of the great lie is dying. Anyone who has ever dealt with science knows full well that no one agrees 99% on anything. Only a moronic fool believes they would or can. Science simply doesn't work that way.



So you are saying that less than 99% of scientists believe that light is wave-particle? Less than 99% of scientists believe that our planet has a magnetic field which protects us from cosmic radiation? Less than 99% of scientists believe that DNA is the building block of biological development?

You are the moronic fool to say that 99%+ scientists can't agree on things. When a theory has been examined thoroughly over decades, and the same conclusion is reached by every scientist who tests that theory, then they can all agree.

If they dont agree where are all the papers refuting that global warming is primarily man made, you moronic fool.
huntmmup
hunter
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:27 pm

Re: Global Warming: 9,136 vs. 1

Postby ScaupHunter » Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:51 am

huntmmup wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:
huntmmup wrote:What is this butthurt term? Is it supposed to be funny or demeaning? It makes you sound like a child. You said explicitly that we should only trust the experts on subjects, well here you go all but 1 of the experts agree.


Yep, totally butt hurt. His dream of the great lie is dying. Anyone who has ever dealt with science knows full well that no one agrees 99% on anything. Only a moronic fool believes they would or can. Science simply doesn't work that way.



So you are saying that less than 99% of scientists believe that light is wave-particle? Less than 99% of scientists believe that our planet has a magnetic field which protects us from cosmic radiation? Less than 99% of scientists believe that DNA is the building block of biological development?

You are the moronic fool to say that 99%+ scientists can't agree on things. When a theory has been examined thoroughly over decades, and the same conclusion is reached by every scientist who tests that theory, then they can all agree.

If they dont agree where are all the papers refuting that global warming is primarily man made, you moronic fool.



Hey Knuck. How many scientists thought the world was flat? How many would have agreed? How many thought the Atom was only made of Protons, Neutrons, and Electrons. How many would have said that was true 100%? Your argument is specious at best. For a scientist you sure do suck at making the proper assumptions, which is what leads to your horribly flawed view of the conclusions being made. Science is evolving and your grandchildren will be laughing at your stupidity in the not so distant future.

Again! Any scientist or human that believes anything that 99% of the scientists agrees on is accurate is a fool. What we know today will be completely different in 10, 50, and 100 years. Every good scientist knows that his or her models are wrong. The questions is how wrong and are the results even slightly applicable to the real world. When you have scientists riding an agenda and looking for money you have corruption instead of science.

By the way, since you seem to have a rather self inflated view of yourself. Spinnerman is a Nuke. As in a Phd type nuke. Multiple degrees. Top in his field. That kind of guy. Plenty of other folks here have advanced degrees. Not only are you not something special in this crowd, your ignorance of real science is showing! Me I am just a lowly BSCE. Only one little pitiful degree. Just a non-technical degree type. You know Civil Engineering. You know where we take all the stuff the guys who do science find and then apply it to the real world. You know who we are. The guys who pizz you off when we come back and tell you that your theory was wrong and doesn't really work in the world of reality.

The one primary thing I learned in college about folks getting advanced degrees was that being a doctorate does not make you intelligent. It just makes you educated. I have seen genius level doctorates who are to stupid to do anything of real value for science, the world, and humanity as a whole. I have also seen moderately intelligent doctorates perform amazing research projects and produce incredible results that benefit us all.

Climb down off you self imposed pedestal. No one here is impressed.

Stop acting the fool. No one here is going to agree with you when you claim 99% of all scientists agree on anything. They quite simply don't. Now if you want to show some scientific integrity and actually discuss and link to what they actually agreed on then we can have a discussion of the merits of your points. Until then you are just another 16 year old in your mommies basement making claims to fame. :beer:
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6703
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Next

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests