Global Warming Absurdity - Page 18 - Political Fever

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**171** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truth for a Change

I don't think that you are in a position to know what training or Knowledge based I have.

The quantity of retarded things you say speaks otherwise. An actual professional would not make such stupid statements like "prove CO2 is a greenhouse gas." You clearly are not a climatologist. THat would like an engineer asking you to prove thermodynamics because he doesn't believe it. It just doesn't happen.

Quote:

My claims are based on [...] AND an actual inability to find any published data on the subject which equivocally demonstrates what the Leftists and Democrats are all saying is DOGMA.

So your argument is based on your personal inability to find any information on the subject, therefore, global warming is wrong.

You want equivocal information? I think you need to consult a dictionary, bub. Is English your second language?

Quote:

If there is DOGMA.. there must be some data to back it up.

Well, no, if it's Dogma, it generally doesn't have information to back it up. It's a theory, which does.

Quote:

If you have that data, please provide it here.

You can't handle the data. That's already been demonstrated, as you will just go "nu-uh! Put your head in the sand, and deny it is evidence. Creationists do the same thing. They demand evidence of evolution, and then when it's provided, they ignore it and pretend it was ne'er given. Sorry, but I ain't gonna play that game with you.

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**172** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 02:49 PM

Quote:

I also think that the computer programs show CO2 is a greenhouse gas but not at 380 PPM... at such a minute concentration it would not be effective in doing much of anything except feed plants.

You have failed to provided evidence for this statement or the source you got the "fact" from.

Truth for a Change · #**173** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

The quantity of retarded things you say speaks otherwise. An actual professional would not make such stupid statements like "prove CO2 is a greenhouse gas." You clearly are not a climatologist. THat would like an engineer asking you to prove thermodynamics because he doesn't believe it. It just doesn't happen.

So your argument is based on your personal inability to find any information on the subject, therefore, global warming is wrong.
You want equivocal information? I think you need to consult a dictionary, bub. Is English your second language?

Well, no, if it's Dogma, it generally doesn't have information to back it up. It's a theory, which does.

You can't handle the data. That's already been demonstrated, as you will just go "nu-uh! Put your head in the sand, and deny it is evidence. Creationists do the same thing. They demand evidence of evolution, and then when it's provided, they ignore it and pretend it was ne'er given. Sorry, but I ain't gonna play that game with you.

There are no data to handle... at least what I have seen. If you have the data, go ahead and prove me wrong..

If you are so certain about your position, why are you calling me names and seem so scared? I only asked the question and tried to find the data..

show me the data if you are so sure about it...

Truth for a Change · #**174** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

You have failed to provided evidence for this statement or the source you got the "fact" from.

Facts are that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is about 380 ppm. and the comrades are saying that 10 - 20 ppm are what is causing the (yet undocumented) increase in earth's temperature.

Where are the data to show that 10 - 20 ppm co2 can do this?

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**175** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 04:06 PM

Quote:

If you are so certain about your position, why are you calling me names and seem so scared?

Because mocking you is amusing me. That's why.

Given your "nuh-uh" style of debating in the other thread, I have no desire to have you ignore the evidence in this one.

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**176** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 04:07 PM

You have made an assertion that obviously implies you have some training in this field. THerefore, where did you get your degree in climate science such that you can make such a definitive "no" statement??

Obviously, you disagree with scientists, so you must have significant training in the field.

Truth for a Change · #**177** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

Because mocking you is amusing me. That's why.

Given your "nuh-uh" style of debating in the other thread, I have no desire to have you ignore the evidence in this one.

You are afraid that what I am saying is true.. LOL.

I don't need to debate this.. ALL I need to do is demonstrate that there are no data.. go ahead and ask any climatologist to provide the data.. I will show you where it is wrong.

LOL.. YOU are out of your league ..

Truth for a Change · #**178** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian

You have made an assertion that obviously implies you have some training in this field. THerefore, where did you get your degree in climate science such that you can make such a definitive "no" statement??

Obviously, you disagree with scientists, so you must have significant training in the field.

The issue is NOT with me.. and you cannot make ME the issue. I have more than enough training to evaluate the ridiculous evidence that has been put forward to advance this hoax..

In fact .. there are little if any data that I have found..

Go ahead and find it..

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**179** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 09:06 PM

Quote:

You are afraid that what I am saying is true.. LOL.

No. I am afraid your stupidity might be contagious.

LoL is right.

Quote:

I don't need to debate this..

You aren't anyway, so you got it covered already.

Quote:

ALL I need to do is demonstrate that there are no data..

All you have done is go "lulz, I can' find nuthin' on mah google-search'n, therefore, it do'n exist. And weeehaw jimmybob, and all those litist liberulz eclimatologist-athingies are idgits who don't know nuth'n bout nuth'n...but I do, even though I gots me no degree whatsoever in the field I am pontificating on, a-huck!"

You're confusing the inability to understand and find something with it being wrong, not-existent.

Durrrrr.

Quote:

I will show you where it is wrong.

You can't show someone where the bathroom is, much less why climatologists' data are wrong.

Technocratic_Utilitarian · #**180** (**permalink**) 08-22-2008, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truth for a Change

The issue is NOT with me.. and you cannot make ME the issue. I have more than enough training to evaluate the ridiculous evidence that has been put forward to advance this hoax.. p

No, you obviously don't. In fact, I don't think you have the qualifications to serve me a cheeseburger at a fast-food joint.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name		Remember Me?
Password