kelpdiver 2 #26 March 26, 2010 Quote Clearly you have no idea what you're talking about. I've never - ever backpedalled on this or any forum. "I'm not in denial. I swear!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbwing 0 #27 March 26, 2010 That's about the answer I expected... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #28 March 26, 2010 QuoteSsshhh - you'll upset the folks who claim GW stopped in 1998. "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." - Climate researcher Kevin TrenberthMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #29 March 26, 2010 www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/0324/Global-warming-as-peacemaker-Disputed-island-disappears-under-rising-sea.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #30 March 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteSsshhh - you'll upset the folks who claim GW stopped in 1998. "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." - Climate researcher Kevin Trenberth I brought this up last year. Many of the alarmist crowd scoff at the notion that warming has paused for in excess of a decade. Yet others, with a great deal of credibility not only as scientists but as alarmists, are desperate to explain this - and have not. To paraphrase what is often written on here, the laws of thermodynamics suggest this shouldn't happen (increased CO2 means increased LR absorption and increased temperature - so why isn't temperature increasing?). The usual suspects - volcanoes and "strong" La Nina - were ruled out. What is the problem? The data? No. Looked good. The physics? Nothing that we understand appears to be causing it. Now some predict that this will continue. Others predict it's over. And still others claim it isn't happening (maybe we should call them "deniers" and "contrarians.") I personally don't think it's a travesty that they cannot explain it. I think it's science - not yet an explanation. They've got to work toward one. Find an answer. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 390 #31 March 26, 2010 http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=3538 Ring the bell school is in session. The rest of the story: http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=3538 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #32 March 26, 2010 Quotehttp://www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=3538 Ring the bell school is in session. The rest of the story: http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=3538 Nice unbiased, authoritative source, as you can tell from the name of the site. PS Congratulations on finally learning how to make a clicky.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 390 #33 March 27, 2010 Thank you, That was my first clicky. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #34 March 27, 2010 Quote Thank you, That was my first clicky. BEEEEEEEER Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 390 #35 March 27, 2010 By your reasoning, a math teacher suggesting that 2+2=4 would be biased. \ BTW I live in the epicenter of the whole AGW debate. There is the Penn State climate mafia on one hand and the Accuweather mafia on the other. I know the players I know the agendas and I know how this movie ends. That is why I am being such an ass about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #36 March 27, 2010 Quote By your reasoning, a math teacher suggesting that 2+2=4 would be biased. \ . I think you could learn something about logical reasoning from rushmc.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #37 March 27, 2010 Quote Quote By your reasoning, a math teacher suggesting that 2+2=4 would be biased. \ . I think you could learn something about logical reasoning from rushmc. Beats yours all to hell so Good advice!"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #38 March 27, 2010 Quote Quote Quote By your reasoning, a math teacher suggesting that 2+2=4 would be biased. \ . I think you could learn something about logical reasoning from rushmc. Beats yours all to hell so Good advice! ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #39 March 27, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote By your reasoning, a math teacher suggesting that 2+2=4 would be biased. \ . I think you could learn something about logical reasoning from rushmc. Beats yours all to hell so Good advice! And the bantering back and forth is not going to stop anytime soon huh?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 390 #40 March 28, 2010 ROTFLMAO Kallend said logic???? That is rich. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,683 #41 March 28, 2010 QuoteROTFLMAO Kallend said logic???? That is rich. Thanks for confirming that Billvon was right.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
