trump: oblivious moron or psychotically narcissistic oblivious moron?

Sailor said:
Doing the same partisan bullshit he is trying here. It got to the point everyone ignored him. He found a new place, changed his name, started lying about his being a lawyer and the rest of the bullshit all over again. Got caught again. It is a viscous circle for him.
Click to expand...
He seems to have taken to the cuckoos, well at least until he's served his purpose and they throw him out of the nest.

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
Sailor said:
A smart person always knows at least one other way out. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Really, Sailor?

Milagro was asked to support his assertion, namely to provide evidence to "demonstrate why evince is a lunatic".

Now you're honoring his sleazy refusal to do so by pretending that weasel is "smart"?

That is disappointing. All the while I agree that smart persons know more ways out than, well, less smart ones. That's just common sense. A person of integrity also knows that some ways out are too sleazy to take, and some are verboten outright. Among the latter certainly are any and all attempts at spreading slander and going into hiding when asked to back it up.
 
cnm said:
Which is why........your posted graph is........irrelevant and stupid, as well as ending in 1995. Nor..........does it show warming at a...........greater rate than current trends, which.......you asserted. I'm not going to.........find your post again, I get it that you..........will deny anything you've said............even when your nose is rubbed in it.
Click to expand...

my graph shows the trends over 450,000 years......in comparison your argument is like claiming it rained yesterday....

Nor..........does it show warming at a...........greater rate than current trends, which.......you asserted
Click to expand...

lol.....you realize YOU are the one arguing that the "current" rate is faster than ever before.........proving you wrong is not a claim that it used to be FASTER......its a claim that what is happening now is what is demonstrated on my graph..........
 
kflaux said:
So you cannot define "drastic" in a quantitatively meaningful manner.
Click to expand...
are you incapable of seeing it for yourself?......sorry, I didn't think you needed to be spoon fed.......as the graph shows the temperatures at which we have peaked are significantly lower than that reached in previous cycles.......also, as the thick red blur over the last several thousand years shows we have experienced a much longer period of stable temperatures before dropping back to the cold slide that occurred in previous cycles........
 
PostmodernProphet said:
my graph shows the trends over 450,000 years......in comparison your argument is like claiming it rained yesterday....



lol.....you realize YOU are the one arguing that the "current" rate is faster than ever before.........proving you wrong is not a claim that it used to be FASTER......its a claim that what is happening now is what is demonstrated on my graph..........
Click to expand...

This guy is apparently the sciencey one amongst the Cuckoos, like he is some sort of knight in a jousting match fighting for the honour of a fair lady. I wonder what favours they will bestow on the good sir, a scarf, a lock of hair or even a garter?

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Milagro said:
This guy is apparently the sciencey onr amongst the Cuckoos, like he is some sort of knight in a jousting match fighting for the honour of a fair lady. I wonder what favours they will bestow on the good sir, a scarf, a lock of hair or even a garter?

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't know about hair but he could use new garters.........his socks are falling down all around him.........
 
Milagro said:
No I actually thought you were fair minded but you have now disabused me of that belief.

Lindzen is a true colossus in atmospheric physics, has written several hundred papers, was a lead author of Chapter 7, "Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks," of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Third Assessment Report on climate change and wrote a standard textbook entitled Dynamics in Atmospheric Physics.

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Lindzen is a hack, a Charles Koch funded climate contrarian. There's a reason this "colossus" and his opinions were publicly rejected by 22 professors at MIT who are experts in their climate program just a couple months ago.

His letter to discourage addressing AGW would have been an embarrassment to any truly distinguished scientist.

[FONT=&quot]Carbon dioxide, wrote the petitioners, “is not a pollutant but a major benefit to agriculture and other life on Earth” — a statement at odds with every major science academy around the world.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Media outlets including Fox News, The Hill, and Daily Caller took Lindzen’s word that the list did indeed have “eminent scientists” and “qualified individuals” without bothering to check, or even ask if this qualified as news.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Because in reality, Lindzen’s list is a rehash of previous “open letters” and petitions going back almost a decade, carrying many of the same names and making the same worn-out arguments that CO2 is good for the planet.[/FONT]
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/02/...300-scientists-trump-usual-parade-non-experts
 
X.O. said:
Lindzen is a hack, a Charles Koch funded climate contrarian. There's a reason this "colossus" and his opinions were publicly rejected by 22 professors at MIT who are experts in their climate program just a couple months ago.

His letter to discourage addressing AGW would have been an embarrassment to any truly distinguished scientist.

[FONT=&quot]Carbon dioxide, wrote the petitioners, “is not a pollutant but a major benefit to agriculture and other life on Earth” — a statement at odds with every major science academy around the world.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Media outlets including Fox News, The Hill, and Daily Caller took Lindzen’s word that the list did indeed have “eminent scientists” and “qualified individuals” without bothering to check, or even ask if this qualified as news.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Because in reality, Lindzen’s list is a rehash of previous “open letters” and petitions going back almost a decade, carrying many of the same names and making the same worn-out arguments that CO2 is good for the planet.[/FONT]
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/02/...300-scientists-trump-usual-parade-non-experts
Click to expand...

Lol, I wondered how long it would be before you resorted to a load of bollocks like the DeSmogBlog, co-founded by a convicted money launderer, and run by James Hoggan who owns a PR agency in Canada.

Even Rana has learnt not to quote from that bunch of crooks, I am sorry my fine feathered friend but you have revealed your hand and I now know you are truly full of shit. Sadly you are so Ill informed that you just googled Richard Lindzen and posted the first piece of dirt you could find, pathetic really.

"Popular Technology describes DeSmogBlog as “a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man,” adding:

“Since its creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dare oppose an alarmist position on global warming. Their articles frequently reference unreliable sources such as Wikipedia and Sourcewatch since they are unable to find any fact based criticisms of those they attack in respected news sources.”



Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
Milagro said:
Lol, I wondered how long it would be before you resorted to a load of bollocks like the DeSmogBlog, co-founded by a convicted money launderer, and run by James Hoggan who owns a PR agency in Canada.

Even Rana has learnt not to quote from that bunch of crooks, I am sorry my fine feathered friend but you have revealed your hand and I now know you are truly full of shit. Sadly you are so Ill informed that you just googled Richard Lindzen and posted the first piece of dirt you could find, pathetic really.

"Popular Technology describes DeSmogBlog as “a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man,” adding:

“Since its creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dare oppose an alarmist position on global warming. Their articles frequently reference unreliable sources such as Wikipedia and Sourcewatch since they are unable to find any fact based criticisms of those they attack in respected news sources.”



Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Then their specific statements should be easy for you to dispute. Have at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top