The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Explain like I'm 5 why libs believe in manmade global warming
Poast new message in this thread
Date: April 15th, 2014 4:44 PM Author: Bipolar spruce gay wizard center (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25388152) |
Date: April 15th, 2014 4:49 PM Author: judgmental swashbuckling pisswyrm http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
Slavish obedience to scientific consensus without the reptilian courage to examine the data by their own lights |
 |
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:26 PM Author: arousing sex offender Its scientists job to interpret data. Its your job to make sure companies merge and aquire. Who would you trust? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662502) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:35 PM Author: razzmatazz skinny woman house Those who do, do. Those who can't do, teach.
These "scientists" are mostly glorified teachers -- lifelong academics with no common sense and an axe to grind. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:39 PM Author: arousing sex offender bro they're putting too much fluoride in our tap water, better not drink it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662569) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:53 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot WOW NASA has the intellectual dishonesty to post that 97% number??? The number is actually "of the 60% of academic articles published in journals that took a position on anthropological global warming (40% took no position) 97% took the position that humans had contributed some (not necessarily the primary) effect." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662629) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:58 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate that quote is a fucking travesty, and you should feel ashamed that you even considered copy/pasting it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662653) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:02 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot Are you saying it is wrong? Link to 97% number calculation??? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662671) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:03 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate SHOCK POLL: 100% of papers not about global warming take no position on global warming!
Sure, 34% of papers took no position, but of the 66% that took a position, nearly all suggest the evidence affirms the hypothesis that greenhouse gas emissions lead to anthropogenic (not "anthropological," lol) climate change
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:04 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot That's not what I said. Anyway, do you have the methodology as to how the 97% number was developed? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662684) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:05 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate Sure, 66% of papers took no position, but of the 33% that took a position, nearly all suggest the evidence affirms the hypothesis that greenhouse gas emissions lead to anthropogenic (not "anthropological," lol) climate change
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:10 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot Looks like we are both wrong. Read closely. 65% expressed no opinion on AGW.
I'm typing from a phone and I did not review the autocorrect breh, so sorry. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:15 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate fuck, yeah i got two things reversed because I assumed the original number you quoted was roughly accurate. either way, your point is dumb, if that is really your point. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662726) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:19 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot So 65% take no opinion yet parroting out 97% is wise and rejecting the. 97% number is dumb. Ok arrow (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662746) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:23 PM Author: motley newt But arrow FEEEEEEEELLLLLS that he is right, so he wins. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662758) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:39 PM Author: lascivious state wrinkle are you really trying to defend muscular fagtard's retarded point? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662836) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:27 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate /*\/*\NEWSFLASH: 99% of geology papers take no position on whether the Earth is flat or round! Round Earthers on the defensive! /*\/*\ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662786) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:29 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot Lol not a good analogy arrow LJL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662793) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:30 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate Why would most papers in a field not directly impinging on a consensus position mention the consensus position? most geology papers don't mention the consensus position about the shape of the earth, because it's completely irrelevant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662800) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:10 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native And the consensus on climate sensitivity is what? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662708) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:11 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot .34*.97= 33% OF SCIENTISTS AGREE AGW IS REAL!!! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662713) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:15 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate you can't be this dumb (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662724) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:40 PM Author: lascivious state wrinkle that's muscular ginger btw (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662839) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 7:52 AM Author: Plum toilet seat goal in life So yeah he might be that dumb. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25684913) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:14 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot (subthread of guys who actually believe 97% of scientists agree) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25684940) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:02 PM Author: lascivious state wrinkle LOL
link to the glenn beck site you got that from? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:03 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot Link to 97% nber calculation methodology?? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662676) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:21 PM Author: citrine voyeur (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663023) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2014 5:00 PM Author: Dull indecent church roommate because our standard models can account climate changes and their causes going back thousands of years, right up until about 100 years ago. at that point, we start to see a huge divergence between what the standard models predict and what actually occurred. HOWEVER, if we plug in CO2 data, it accounts almost entirely for that divergence. but you said explain like you're 5, so climate modeling and the effects of CO2 might be a little hard to wrap your mind around. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25388257) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:56 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot LOL liar. The models have predicted 4X the warming and failed to predict the "pause." The models are garbage. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662643) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:18 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native BUT BUT BUT IT WENT IN THE OCEAN (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662740) |
|
Date: April 15th, 2014 5:34 PM Author: canary multi-colored orchestra pit degenerate the market will sort everything out (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25388514) |
|
Date: June 6th, 2014 12:56 PM Author: canary multi-colored orchestra pit degenerate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25700269) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 1:05 PM Author: lascivious state wrinkle (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662070) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 1:07 PM Author: Erotic hyperventilating digit ratio libs have sub 100 IQs so they believe in pseudoscience (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662075) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 1:18 PM Author: Twinkling Bearded Brethren these are the XO dark days, they truly are. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662116) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:24 PM Author: arrogant aphrodisiac trust fund meetinghouse (arrow) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662492) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 1:19 PM Author: arrogant aphrodisiac trust fund meetinghouse feels good man (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662124) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 1:28 PM Author: peach mad cow disease shrine Because libs think like 5 year olds (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662187) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:23 PM Author: Amethyst principal's office new version Because the overwhelming scientific consensus suggests it exists? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662489) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:25 PM Author: arrogant aphrodisiac trust fund meetinghouse "it's true bc everyone says so!" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662495) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:30 PM Author: Amethyst principal's office new version Well, no, it's highly plausible because the vast majority of experts who have researched it have reached a consensus.
It's an appeal to authority, sure, but without getting a PHD and running the models yourself what are laymen's other options for evaluating the issue? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:34 PM Author: razzmatazz skinny woman house how about thinking for yourself and using common sense, moron? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662546) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:35 PM Author: arousing sex offender this is not a case where your liberal arts degree applies, kant (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662550) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:36 PM Author: razzmatazz skinny woman house Are you retarded? You seem retarded. It's the liberal arts majors who tend to parrot the lies about global warming. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662557) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:38 PM Author: arousing sex offender please explain how your education qualifies you to make claims about the climatic change of earth over the past 250 years. tyia lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662567) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:48 PM Author: razzmatazz skinny woman house You are retarded. I'm not the one making the claims, it's the global warming proponents. PLease explain how the climate academics are qualified to make claims about the climatic change of earth over the past 250 years. tyia (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662611) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:05 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Instead of appealing to authority with the 98% argument, why don't you try explaining in scientific terms why global warming is real to 5 year old. Are you scientifically illiterate? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662689) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:08 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate infrared energy absorbed by CO2 bonds. this has been known for years. conservation of energy means that energy must be re-radiated as heat. the number of extra energy absorbed by the earth in this manner due to increased CO2 concentrations measurably caused by humans is substantial. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662701) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:09 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Humans cause what percentage of global warming? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662706) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:26 PM Author: arousing sex offender no, but you are if you need it explained (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662773) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:35 PM Author: Amethyst principal's office new version Why would you reject the consensus of those who have researched the issue extensively and have the tools and educational background necessary to reach educated conclusions? That doesn't seem to involve a ton of common sense, sweetheart. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662555) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:07 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native What's the climate sensitivity metric? Do you even know what you're talking about?
BUT BUT BUT CONSENSUS |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:28 PM Author: Amethyst principal's office new version No. I have no idea. I just look to indicators from those who do have an idea.
Do you have annex tensile background in climate research and modeling? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:57 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot Except that isn't actually the case. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662650) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:27 PM Author: Mauve theater friendly grandma This isn't even correct (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662504) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:30 PM Author: Amethyst principal's office new version Yes it is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662523) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:31 PM Author: Mauve theater friendly grandma No, it's not. You're probably parroting that 98% of all scientists believe in manmade global warming, which is an outright lie. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662529) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:32 PM Author: Amethyst principal's office new version Support your argument. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662536) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:57 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot See my first post in this thread. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662652) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:00 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate If I were you I wouldn't be drawing attention to that colossally idiotic post. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662665) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:03 PM Author: lascivious state wrinkle (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662678) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:03 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot Link to 97% number calculation methodology?? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662681) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:06 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate Sure, 66% of papers took no position, but of the 34% that took a position, nearly all suggest the evidence affirms the hypothesis that greenhouse gas emissions lead to anthropogenic (not "anthropological," lol) climate change
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:07 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native And the climate sensitivity metric is what? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662697) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:13 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot You mean 66% took no position? Self pwnd. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662720) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:16 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate yeah, i already edited. i just copy/pasted the same thing over and over again (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662731) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:26 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot The funny thing is you're so brainwashed you just assumed the 65% was the position you wanted to believe. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662778) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:29 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate No, I assumed that number was right because it was close to the one *you* quoted, and I just glossed over it. I just assumed your numbers were roughly accurate. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662794) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:32 PM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot How long since you posted as arrow? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662808) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:03 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Yup, let's just appeal to authority without listening to their reasons bro. You seem dumb (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662674) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:47 PM Author: Crimson geriatric associate field how the fuck does a 5 year old understand such things? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662605) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:49 PM Author: razzmatazz skinny woman house liberal indoctrination about climate change starts at an early age:
http://doctorbulldog.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/sponge-bob.jpg
http://www.akdart.com/edu11.html |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 2:50 PM Author: razzmatazz skinny woman house Wyoming is taking a stand:
http://patdollard.com/2014/05/wyoming-rejects-federal-climate-change-indoctrination-curriculum-for-public-schools/ |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:09 PM Author: Obsidian turdskin it's bizarre and retarded that ordinary people in the US so vehemently discredit global warming - they have absolutely no stake in or link to this fight, other than the fact that conservative politicians spread anti-global warming propaganda to protect business constituents. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662705) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:12 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Yes, because people like Al Gore and Elon Musk didn't literally become billionaires over global warming. Climate scientists certainly have no incentive to get more research funding
Idiot |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 7:37 AM Author: irradiated hall dysfunction and the average person just lived thru the coldest longest winter since fucking 20000 BC
global warming is BS, so it became climate change, which means anything supports the bullshit theory that SUVs are killing GAIA!!!! |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:31 PM Author: odious whorehouse it's not even really questioned anywhere else. evolution is more controversial in the global scientific community. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662801) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:38 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native are you literally retarded? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662828) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:39 PM Author: odious whorehouse lol at how reptiles are fuming mad little yosemite sams over clear scientific consensus. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662834) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:40 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native judithcurry.com (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662838) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:47 PM Author: odious whorehouse *is a fuming mad yosemite sam*
*links a blog by an academic that doesn't disagree that current climate change is man-made* |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 7:56 AM Author: Plum toilet seat goal in life Cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25684916) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:37 PM Author: brindle library people who are hurt You don't think ordinary people can grasp where shitlibs are going with the global warming mantra? Ordinary people care about ordinary jobs. They realize neither they nor their kids are qualified to become social media curators or some other BS "new economy" job, and they want something more for their kids than working at a fucking McDonald's. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662823) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:37 PM Author: vibrant school this. it is an issue for the experts, not a political issue. you know why its a political issue? because one team's retards thinks that we can stop it by limiting CO2 production in america, and the other team's retards represent people that make a shitload of CO2 |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 5:51 PM Author: Boyish buck-toothed juggernaut corn cake "you know why its a political issue? because one team's retards thinks that we can stop it by limiting CO2 production in america, and the other team's retards represent people that make a shitload of CO2"
this is a cogent point |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:19 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot so the Republicans represent everyone in America?
|
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:32 PM Author: marvelous cordovan step-uncle's house Why do you believe ordinary people in the US have no stake in this fight? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663071) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:20 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot because AGW will literally have no noticeable effect on anyones life and increasing the cost of energy will (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25684960) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:16 PM Author: odious whorehouse most prominent GOP leaders and reasonable reptiles now acknowledge that global warming is heavily and directly impacted by human activity.
the only hold-outs are the room temp IQ bible thumpers and enraged ideologue misanthropes. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:17 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native What percentage of global warming is caused by humans? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662735) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:29 PM Author: odious whorehouse i think it's more like an exponential accelerating factor little bro.
anyway your hatred of libs is driving you to embrace policies that at the very least have huge potential to fuck over everyone who lives after you. your misanthropy and anger at the modern world is so severe that you would rather take the risk that the world is a miserable shithole in 80 years than you would institute some policy changes in the present.
even so it's really too late now, so unctuous little closet cases like you already won the battle. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:39 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native What percentage of global warming is caused by humans? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662832) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:41 PM Author: odious whorehouse i don't think you can easily quantify it with a simple percentage. there are lots of things that science indicates clearly exist but can't be perfectly measured. if you think that invalidates the data then lol, i refer you back to your 7th grade unit on the scientific method for further study. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662845) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:42 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native So you can't derive a percentage of global warming caused by humans, yet you insist humans are responsible for that warming? How intellectually bankrupt are you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662848) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:44 PM Author: odious whorehouse (guy who got reading comp pwned by my last post)
lol george_20, never change little bro. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:45 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native What percentage of global warming is caused by humans? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662859) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:50 PM Author: odious whorehouse do u think dark matter exists? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662878) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:50 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native What percentage of global warming is caused by humans? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662881) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:53 PM Author: odious whorehouse a significant percentage, as most non-crazy GOP pols have acknowledged. do u think dark matter exists? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662896) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:54 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native "a significant percentage"
and that percentage is? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:54 PM Author: odious whorehouse "a hair muscular buttocks is preferred"
do u think dark matter exists? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:55 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native What specific percentage of global warming is caused by humans? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662908) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:57 PM Author: odious whorehouse nobody knows an exact percentage. knowledge with exact quantification is possible. for example, do u think dark matter exists? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662916) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:57 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Then how can you claim that humans are causing global warming when you can't even ballpark a percentage caused by humans? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662920) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:03 PM Author: odious whorehouse the most vehement climate change advocate scientists say there is no way to exactly measure our precise impact. they are still experts in their field that understand science.
but i guess the 98.5% of the scientific community who agree with this are all frauds who don't really understand science as well as you do.
do u think there is such a thing as dark matter? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:07 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Oh look. More appeal to authority without discussing the actual proof. Do you even understand WTF you're talking about? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662957) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:15 PM Author: odious whorehouse lol at your vague, childish demands for "proof" of a complex theory, as if a single cited percentage point would even qualify as proof.
honestly man, your lack of basic scientific literacy is a nice example of why reptiles have a hard time understanding climate change and the possible repercussions. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:17 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Did you read the thread title idiot? Explain to a 5 year old why global warming is real. Don't appeal to authority. Explain it in scientific terms for a 5 year old. Are you literally dumb? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663006) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:18 PM Author: odious whorehouse lol, i didn't realize you were eager to literally take advantage of that. sorry many i thought you wanted to have a big boy discussion and i apologize for talking down to you so much. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663011) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:20 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Are you scientifically illiterate that you can't explain why global warming is real to a 5 year old? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663019) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:21 PM Author: odious whorehouse (guy demanding to see THE PROOF) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663024) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:22 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native looks like you're done here. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663031) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:09 PM Author: brindle library people who are hurt I am sure 98.5% of the scientific community agrees with the proposition that but for humanity's presence on earth, the climate would be different than what it is or will be in the future. Who gives a fuck? This statement is completely worthless and has almost no policy implications. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662970) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:14 PM Author: odious whorehouse a huge number of those scientists disagree and mitigation isn't some pie-in-the-sky policy. you can have a long view of the issue and at least start seriously developing policies that will create a less fucked up scenario down the line.
but i also tend to think we're too far gone and can't effectively police china and india, so there's nothing to be done and people in 2080 are just going to have to live with the shitty world we left for them. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:22 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native more appeal to authority. can you just stop? you don't know anything about climate science aside from the misleading 97% figure huh? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663029) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:24 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot LOL the people of 2080's shitty shitty world. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25684968) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:54 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate Do you realize that your argument style (basically repeatedly posting a single nitpicking question over and over again) makes you seem like an idiot and convinces no one? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662902) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:56 PM Author: odious whorehouse he's not really trying to convince anyone so much as console himself. the 'percentage' thing is an ancient, creak talking point from the newt gingrich era in the fucking 90s. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662914) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:57 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native *claims humans are causing global warming*
*can't cite the percentage of global warming caused by humans*
yup, you seem dumb. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:04 PM Author: odious whorehouse if you think a precise 'percentage' is necessary to demonstrate massive human impact, then you fail 7th grade science. you are literally repeating layperson talking point that surfaced in the late 90s. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662945) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:08 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native a ballpark percentage is fine. what is it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662963) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:17 PM Author: odious whorehouse here's one study, i am sure there are many more that agree and disagree.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/three-quarters-of-climate/
do u think there is such a thing as dark matter? answer the question or we are done here my little yosemite sam bro. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:19 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native and yet others say 100%, others say 150%, others say 55%, etc
why is there no consensus? because these figures are coming out of their asses? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:22 PM Author: odious whorehouse (guy terrified to answer a simple question about the existence of dark matter) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663026) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:23 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native (guy terrified at answering simple basic climate science questions because he's scientifically illiterate so he quickly changes topics) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663032) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:25 PM Author: odious whorehouse i answered all your questions several times over.
last time or you are a bigger chickenshit faggot than i thought was possible: do u think there is such a thing as dark matter? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:27 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Why is there no consensus on climate sensitivity? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663048) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:28 PM Author: odious whorehouse lol
george20 confirmed as a massive chickenshit power bottom who is terrified of answering a simpl question about physics. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:29 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Why is there no consensus on climate sensitivity? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663055) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:31 PM Author: Doobsian curious rehab sweet tailpipe You come out of this exchange looking pretty pathetic. I doubt you even understand why that question is relevant but you still undermine everything you say by dodging it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663070) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:32 PM Author: odious whorehouse sorry little dude, but if you're too afraid to answer a simple question, then i don't think we can continue. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663073) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:56 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Do you realize you're an actual retard and too scientifically illiterate to be posting in this thread? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662915) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:57 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate State my IQ before you proceed any further. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662921) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:59 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native 62 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662933) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:33 PM Author: marvelous cordovan step-uncle's house There's not really anything wrong with that position. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663077) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:43 PM Author: brindle library people who are hurt It doesn't necessarily invalidate the data, but it does pretty much negate society's mandate to do a god damn thing about it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662850) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:52 PM Author: odious whorehouse that invokes the risk argument. why the fuck wouldn't we try to do something even there's even a risk of catastrophe?
new policy and regs actually drive innovation and development. this has been born out over and over in anecdotal and comprehensive studies. but despite being pro-development, reptiles reject the notion because status quo is always better and corps are resistant to short term change and regulation. reptiles want to feel like part of a wealthy and informed establishment, so they side with the monolithic stance over choosing the long-term business-friendly and humanitarian position. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:53 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Just stop fossil fuel usage and let people in the third world starve to death bro (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662897) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:55 PM Author: odious whorehouse lol, yes, those are the only reasonable outcomes of reducing the damage we're doing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662903) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:44 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot Feel free to stop using energy. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25685037) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:55 PM Author: thriller mother boltzmann "i don't think you can easily quantify it with a simple percentage."
I don't see why not.
I would expect to see the answer take the following form: "Under current conditions, every [unit] of carbon dioxide discharged into the atmosphere will cause X degrees of warming within Y time."
|
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:59 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Exactly. The IPCC wouldn't even give an estimate on climate sensitivity because they have no idea (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662930) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:09 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate "As the amount of man-made CO2 goes up, temperatures do not rise at the same rate. In fact, although estimates vary - climate sensitivity is a hot topic in climate science, if you’ll forgive the pun - the last IPCC report (AR4) described the likely range as between 2 and 4.5 degrees C, for double the amount of CO2 compared to pre-industrial levels."
http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-temperature-correlation.htm |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:13 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Do you seriously know WTF you're talking about? That figure is revised over and over again
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ipcc-revises-climate-sensitivity/
WTF are you even on here? What grade are you in? |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:07 PM Author: odious whorehouse i am sure people try to ballpark. a simple input/output number is insane and not really worth it. the point is acceleration of change over time, which can be linked with historical data to roughly project what's going to happen. i'm all for skepticism around the margins, but dismissing that it's happening at all because we haven't become perfect climate science prediction mastermen in the last few decades is ridiculous.
|
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:09 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Why is it not worth it? Governments have wanted the IPCC to give them an estimate to manage their carbon emissions but the IPCC has refused to do so. Why? Are you literally this ignorant about climate science? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662968) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:21 PM Author: odious whorehouse it's almost impossible to get concrete percentages for any predictive analysis in most of climate science, not just climate change studies. it's just the nature of it. an exact percentage point would just go under endless debate and scrutiny, and if they somehow fucked it up, that could be detrimental as well. it's a policy efficacy issue, not so much the science. if nobody can get on board with reasonably reducing emissions without an on-the-nose figure, than the political will is lacking in the first place. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663021) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:26 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native this is the most idiotic thing i've read ITT (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663046) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:27 PM Author: odious whorehouse (furious little yosemite sam reptile mechanically responding to every post ITT with brainless ad homs) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663049) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:29 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native Why is there no consensus on climate sensitivity? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663057) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:34 PM Author: thriller mother boltzmann What do you think I was dismissing? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663080) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:07 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate (guy who never got to non-linear equations in algebra class) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662961) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:09 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native (guy who doesn't know anything about climate sensitivity) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662972) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:36 PM Author: thriller mother boltzmann What makes you think that?
Why would non-linearity matter when I used the word "current"?
If I told you that instantaneous rates of change could be measured for some functions, would you believe me?
|
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:39 PM Author: brindle library people who are hurt Take out "heavily" and tone down "directly" somewhat, and you are right. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662833) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:43 PM Author: odious whorehouse fair, but i guess the real point is that the people who actually matter in the GOP and aren't willfully ignorant tea party tools have realized that it's embarrassing and backwards to keep acting like there isn't a clear expert consensus that we're accelerating global warming and it will have negative repercussions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662852) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:47 PM Author: brindle library people who are hurt "we're accelerating global warming and it will have negative repercussions." This statement is meaningless since it doesn't mention any sort of factor by which we are accelerating global warming and doesn't offer any sort of measurement of the negative repercussions. Offering this in support of your argument is every bit as retarded, if not more disingenuous, than those who outright deny the existence of anthropomorphic global warming. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:49 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate but whenever scientists and economists attempt to estimate the effects (and they have estimated the costs in the trillions of dollars over the next century), you dismiss them outright. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662875) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:50 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native What is the scientific consensus on the percentage of global warming caused by humans? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662880) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:51 PM Author: Titillating sapphire tanning salon doctorate What is the scientific consensus on the cause of your severe brain damage? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662887) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:33 PM Author: Drab party of the first part you appear to be actually mentally ill.
i haven't seen anyone repeat themselves this inanely since the daniel brou spammer. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:53 PM Author: brindle library people who are hurt Some nay have made that estimate, while many others have admitted it is impossible to make projections with any degree of certainty.
Also, depending on how many trillions we are talking over the course of a century, those estimated costs don't sound that bad in relation to the likely cost of reducing CO2 emissions. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:10 PM Author: odious whorehouse the fear is more that we hit a tipping point in terms of ocean health, weather patterns, etc.
that all dramatically impacts agriculture and food supply, famine spreads, regional violence and wars escalate, economies destabilize, etc.
fuck man, the pentagon has come out and said that climate change is one of the single biggest security threats to the U.S. and the government spends a fuckton of money researching different contingency plans for the effects of climate change. losing some shit coastline in florida and building dykes around manhattan are not the only problems associated with it. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:15 PM Author: brindle library people who are hurt Damn. This is the first time I have fallen for flame in years. Good job, bro. |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:24 PM Author: odious whorehouse you're right dude, the pentagon is such flame. not like academics and experts all over the planet widely acknowledge that these scenarios are all very possible. highly informed and savvy racist law forum poasters know it's all silly ivory tower flame.
|
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:26 PM Author: Galvanic outnumbered tank native *appeals to authority some more* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663044) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:30 PM Author: odious whorehouse (really smart reptile who licks the boots of the military except when they spend hundreds of millions of dollars researching and prepping for climate change scenarios) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25663062) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:53 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot (really smart shitlib who licks the boots of the military only when they spend hundreds of millions of dollars researching and prepping for climate change scenarios) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25685063) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:52 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot (guy who supports the pentagon's opinion on climate change but rejects it on the middle eastern military actions) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25685060) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:25 PM Author: floppy feces (XO 2014) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662768) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:42 PM Author: lascivious state wrinkle (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662849) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 3:43 PM Author: brass elastic band (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662853) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:12 PM Author: Ivory Crawly Ape how else would you explain it to a shitcon? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25662983) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2014 4:46 PM Author: concupiscible persian casino *claims lack of temperature increase in the last 15 years is "a blip"*
"points to warming between 1970 and 2000 as proof of man made global warming trend* |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 1:56 AM Author: Twinkling Bearded Brethren http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full
The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.
Admittedly, authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point. |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:54 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot This is not where the 97% number came from. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25685066) |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 2:01 AM Author: Twinkling Bearded Brethren Industry opponents of a treaty to fight global warming have drafted an ambitious proposal to spend millions of dollars to convince the public that the environmental accord is based on shaky science.
Among their ideas is a campaign to recruit a cadre of scientists who share the industry's views of climate science and to train them in public relations so they can help convince journalists, politicians and the public that the risk of global warming is too uncertain to justify controls on greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide that trap the sun's heat near Earth.
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/26/us/industrial-group-plans-to-battle-climate-treaty.html |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 2:11 AM Author: Twinkling Bearded Brethren http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/sep/21/climate-scientists-christopher-monckton (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25666053) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:55 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot It is shaky science. You can predict climate as much as you can predict the stock market. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25685071) |
|
Date: June 1st, 2014 2:04 AM Author: Twinkling Bearded Brethren do you idiots realize that this "debate" about whether anthropogenic climate change is happening is a debate that only happens in America?
the rest of the world is debating what to do about it.
|
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:23 AM Author: primrose hissy fit (Idiot callimg western europe "the rest of the world") (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25684966) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 8:55 AM Author: Racy lodge coffee pot LOL no the rest of the world doesn't give a shit and is far more concerned with feeding themselves. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2544114&forum_id=2#25685075) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2014 5:39 AM Author: Idiotic Senate 18000000 work by george20 ittt
|