Recommended Posts
turtlespeed 212
QuoteQuoteNot posting them again - feel free to scroll back and re-read or look at graphs again until you figure it out.
In other words, you've got nothing.
No - it means he is tired of people that are dilberately putting blinders on.
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteNot posting them again - feel free to scroll back and re-read or look at graphs again until you figure it out.
In other words, you've got nothing.
I've got data from the NSIDC - the same place kallend got *his* graph from.
*You've* got nothing.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
quade 4
QuoteQuoteQuoteNot posting them again - feel free to scroll back and re-read or look at graphs again until you figure it out.
In other words, you've got nothing.
No - it means he is tired of people that are dilberately putting blinders on.
Really? Or is he hiding behind it because he can't support his claim?
Here, let me quote his claim again;
Quote
Antarctic ice is trending up and is, in fact, at an all-time high.
No. He's proved ZERO substantiation of this claim. Not in any previous posting. Nowhere.
He CAN'T provide it because it's a bullshit claim.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
turtlespeed 212
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteNot posting them again - feel free to scroll back and re-read or look at graphs again until you figure it out.
In other words, you've got nothing.
No - it means he is tired of people that are dilberately putting blinders on.
Really? Or is he hiding behind it because he can't support his claim?
Here, let me quote his claim again;Quote
Antarctic ice is trending up and is, in fact, at an all-time high.
No. He's proved ZERO substantiation of this claim. Not in any previous posting. Nowhere.
He CAN'T provide it because it's a bullshit claim.
So is the conclusion that is brought as truth - the whole global warming Bull shit
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteNot posting them again - feel free to scroll back and re-read or look at graphs again until you figure it out.
In other words, you've got nothing.
No - it means he is tired of people that are dilberately putting blinders on.
Really? Or is he hiding behind it because he can't support his claim?
Here, let me quote his claim again;Quote
Antarctic ice is trending up and is, in fact, at an all-time high.
No. He's proved ZERO substantiation of this claim. Not in any previous posting. Nowhere.
He CAN'T provide it because it's a bullshit claim.
So prove the graph false, Paul.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
quade 4
QuoteSo prove the graph false, Paul.
The ice age, Mike. Antarctica had more ice during the ice age than it does now. That pretty much invalidates your claim.
When you toss around a term like "all-time" it's almost always going to be easily proven false.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
turtlespeed 212
QuoteQuoteSo prove the graph false, Paul.
The ice age, Mike. Antarctica had more ice during the ice age than it does now. That pretty much invalidates your claim.
When you toss around a term like "all-time" it's almost always going to be easily proven false.
If you are reasonable and understand that he is referring to recorded history - you might want to try to prove him wrong.
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
quade 4
QuoteQuoteQuoteSo prove the graph false, Paul.
The ice age, Mike. Antarctica had more ice during the ice age than it does now. That pretty much invalidates your claim.
When you toss around a term like "all-time" it's almost always going to be easily proven false.
If you are reasonable and understand that he is referring to recorded history - you might want to try to prove him wrong.
Recorded history includes the "little" ice age. Try again.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
turtlespeed 212
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo prove the graph false, Paul.
The ice age, Mike. Antarctica had more ice during the ice age than it does now. That pretty much invalidates your claim.
When you toss around a term like "all-time" it's almost always going to be easily proven false.
If you are reasonable and understand that he is referring to recorded history - you might want to try to prove him wrong.
Recorded history includes the "little" ice age. Try again.
In the little ice age you refer to - did the ice forming patterns exceed the ones we have now?
With the tech we had then, how is it possible to know.
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteSo prove the graph false, Paul.
The ice age, Mike. Antarctica had more ice during the ice age than it does now. That pretty much invalidates your claim.
Except for that whole 'for the recorded period' that you keep conveniently mislaying.
QuoteWhen you toss around a term like "all-time" it's almost always going to be easily proven false.
That's all you've got? One instance where I didn't add the 'for the recorded period' or similar?
Fucking lame. You've got nothing.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo prove the graph false, Paul.
The ice age, Mike. Antarctica had more ice during the ice age than it does now. That pretty much invalidates your claim.
When you toss around a term like "all-time" it's almost always going to be easily proven false.
If you are reasonable and understand that he is referring to recorded history - you might want to try to prove him wrong.
Recorded history includes the "little" ice age. Try again.
The graph doesn't encompass the little ice age, Paul. Try again.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
quade 4
QuoteOne instance where I didn't add the 'for the recorded period' or similar?
People have been heavily criticized for far less. For example, usage of the word "clip" when the absolutely correct word for a particular weapon is "magazine." Far too many examples in this forum to go over point-by-point.
If you're going to bandy about an absolute term such as "all-time", I'm sorry but it's more than fair game for criticism.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
rushmc 18
QuoteQuoteOne instance where I didn't add the 'for the recorded period' or similar?
People have been heavily criticized for far less. For example, usage of the word "clip" when the absolutely correct word for a particular weapon is "magazine." Far too many examples in this forum to go over point-by-point.
If you're going to bandy about an absolute term such as "all-time", I'm sorry but it's more than fair game for criticism.
Ok, so you made your point.
It this where you get off or do dare getting back on the topic?
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
billvon 2,772
>period' or similar? Fucking lame.
Much denier rhetoric is based on slip-ups of similar sorts by climate scientists. A denier will discover an error in a dataset, for example. And instead of correcting the error and seeing how it changes the outcome, they will then deny the validity of everything that scientist has ever done, and everything his colleages have ever done. They find a crumb and discard the mountain it is a part of. The attempted crucifixion of Mann is a good example here - one you have participated in with great enthusiasm.
You may indeed find such things fucking lame. If so, perhaps attending to the beam in your own eye would be in order.
If not, well, you have just given yourself the level of credibility you give Mann, Gore et al.
mnealtx 0
QuoteQuoteOne instance where I didn't add the 'for the recorded period' or similar?
People have been heavily criticized for far less. For example, usage of the word "clip" when the absolutely correct word for a particular weapon is "magazine." Far too many examples in this forum to go over point-by-point.
If you're going to bandy about an absolute term such as "all-time", I'm sorry but it's more than fair game for criticism.
So, you had nothing besides a nitpick that had NOTHING to do with the data provided - thanks for clarifying that.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
mnealtx 0
Quote>That's all you've got? One instance where I didn't add the 'for the recorded
>period' or similar? Fucking lame.
Much denier rhetoric is based on slip-ups of similar sorts by climate scientists. A denier will discover an error in a dataset, for example. And instead of correcting the error and seeing how it changes the outcome, they will then deny the validity of everything that scientist has ever done, and everything his colleages have ever done. They find a crumb and discard the mountain it is a part of. The attempted crucifixion of Mann is a good example here - one you have participated in with great enthusiasm.
Like you/kallend have done with Lindzen and others?
QuoteYou may indeed find such things fucking lame. If so, perhaps attending to the beam in your own eye would be in order.
Lemme know when Mann released a new 'hockey stick' that accurately represents the MWP and LIA, kthx.
QuoteIf not, well, you have just given yourself the level of credibility you give Mann, Gore et al.
As you and kallend have given yourselves the level of credibility that you have given Lindzen, Watts, McIntyre, McKittrick, etc.
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
quade 4
QuoteSo, you had nothing besides a nitpick that had NOTHING to do with the data provided - thanks for clarifying that.
No sir. I asked for you to provide data to support your claim. It's entirely possible you actually had data of some sort that was not readily apparent. It turns out, you had overstated your claim by a large margin with absolutely nothing to back it up.
The fault in that doesn't rest with me, but with yourself.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
kallend 1,853
QuoteQuoteAre you thrown by the article title? Because the article itself certainly doesn't support your position that the Antarctic ice is now "at an all-time high."
Don't really give a shit about the article,.
Apparently!
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
In other words, you've got nothing.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites