Good News Sucks for Climate Cultists

[Saint Guinefort]

RQAA.

None. It is YOU that has an issue.

Obviously, you have lost context.

I love how weak you are in your position. You don't even trust yourself. That's never a good sign. Do you agree with Lindzen or not?

 

[Saint Guinefort]

There is no such thing as 'climate science'. Climate is not a branch of science.

As usual, you are wrong.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I just scanned through this thread from the OP to post 81 (the one I am responding to), and I found exactly ZERO articles in it posted by YOU. So, there is no "opposite of (my) opinion" to respond to. Nada, nothing, zip-point-shit.

My position stands. The mainstream climate scientists are more involved in politics than science, their findings to date are mostly crap, their predictions are nearly 100% wrong. They've been wrong so much and so often, only a complete fool would believe them. Until they can show that their science is valid and their predictions reasonably correct, and that will take some doing now, there is no reason to believe a thing they say.

In all fairness, you can't buy a Malibu beach house with facts. You need grant money - those who dole out grants have a CONCLUSION they want. If grant whores don't deliver the CONCLUSION the client is buying, then sales drop off.

Climatology, like palm reading, is about telling the client what they want to hear. Science was discarded 40 years ago.

 

[Into the Night]

Post #79. Second paragraph. There's two links in there.

Gosh I hate to think how sloppy you are overall if you couldn't find those. THey were addressed directly TO YOU.

Nope. He asked for data, not religious statements. Try again. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Nope. He asked for data, not religious statements. Try again. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

He said he didn't find any links. I pointed him in the direction of where the links are at.

Why do you think your opinion is so important on EVERYTHING? You realize no one actually takes anything you say seriously, right? You aren't under the impression that your posts are of any value whatsoever are you?

 

[Into the Night]

In fact, part of the weather change predictions includes more severe storms and tornadoes, and hurricanes. Look about if you have doubts. The proof is there. https://yaleclimateconnections.org/...iZb81mZ76p1jOGNeLXVGEGxwOxLLjviRoCTYIQAvD_BwE

Speculation is not a proof. The National Hurricane center disagrees with you.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

In all fairness, you can't buy a Malibu beach house with facts. You need grant money

And you don't know how grant money is apportioned.

- those who dole out grants have a CONCLUSION they want.

Funny...I lived with someone whose job it was to assess incoming grant applications for earth science research. And she never said that. In fact she said just the opposite.

But I'm sure YOU are far more knowledgeable on this topic than the people who actually do it.

 

[Into the Night]

I love how weak you are in your position. You don't even trust yourself. That's never a good sign. Do you agree with Lindzen or not?

RQAA.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Post #79. Second paragraph. There's two links in there.

Gosh I hate to think how sloppy you are overall if you couldn't find those. THey were addressed directly TO YOU.

You didn't make them obvious URL's like this

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/...iZb81mZ76p1jOGNeLXVGEGxwOxLLjviRoCTYIQAvD_BwE

That makes them hard to spot. I'll read them, but I'm not expecting much.

 

[Into the Night]

He said he didn't find any links. I pointed him in the direction of where the links are at.

Why do you think your opinion is so important on EVERYTHING? You realize no one actually takes anything you say seriously, right? You aren't under the impression that your posts are of any value whatsoever are you?

He asked for data, not religious statements. Try again. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism). Repetition fallacy (chanting).

 

[Into the Night]

As usual, you are wrong.

Not wrong. Climate is not a branch of science. There is no such thing as 'climate science'. Climate has no value associated with it. What is changing?

 

[Lionfish]

Throwing money at globull warming is like stapling money to the clouds

 

[Into the Night]

He said he didn't find any links.

He didn't find any links to what he requested.

I pointed him in the direction of where the links are at.

You never made any links to what he requested.

Why do you think your opinion is so important on EVERYTHING?

For the same reason you do.

You realize no one actually takes anything you say seriously, right?
You aren't under the impression that your posts are of any value whatsoever are you?

Bulverism fallacy.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

You didn't make them obvious URL's like this

Sorry you are unfamiliar with how hyperlinks work. They have been on the internet since the 1990's.

That makes them hard to spot.

Are you new to the internet?

 

[Saint Guinefort]

He didn't find any links to what he requested.

That's why I helped him find them. He doesn't know how hyperlinks work on the internet. No harm, no foul. Everybody has to learn sometime.

You never made any links to what he requested.

That's a lie.

 

[Into the Night]

And you don't know how grant money is apportioned.

Simple. Money is taken from those that produce by force and given to those that produce nothing. It's communism.

Funny...I lived with someone whose job it was to assess incoming grant applications for earth science research.

Earth is not a branch of science. There is no such thing as 'earth science'.

And she never said that. In fact she said just the opposite.
But I'm sure YOU are far more knowledgeable on this topic than the people who actually do it.

Who is 'she'? Why does anything that 'she' said make any difference?

 

[Into the Night]

You didn't make them obvious URL's like this

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/...iZb81mZ76p1jOGNeLXVGEGxwOxLLjviRoCTYIQAvD_BwE

That makes them hard to spot. I'll read them, but I'm not expecting much.

Already read it. It's just a circular argument. It's fundamentalism. No data is presented. Only religious statements. It does try to name drop NOAA and NASA, as if they somehow had some magick data.
Of course the historic data from the National Hurricane center disagrees with the article. That can be found here.

 

[Into the Night]

Throwing money at globull warming is like stapling money to the clouds

 

[Into the Night]

Sorry you are unfamiliar with how hyperlinks work. They have been on the internet since the 1990's.



Are you new to the internet?

A Holy Link is not a proof. You never provided any links to the data he requested.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Simple. Money is taken from those that produce by force and given to those that produce nothing. It's communism.

Earth is not a branch of science. There is no such thing as 'earth science'.

Who is 'she'? Why does anything that 'she' said make any difference?

You're too funny. (Well, not really "funny", more like "sad" and "pathetic". But if it helps keep you occupied I guess it's all good. Enjoy spreading misinformation and lies.