turtlespeed 212 #301 July 4, 2014 billvon>the gov is creating the manipulated data it uses to support this Ah, so now the US military is a liberal organization. (Would explain the right wing's new "some men left behind" approach I guess.) >"The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot >necessarily be linked to climate change . . . " You're right! I guess you're feeling pretty stupid about posting this, then: "NOAA Reinstates July 1936 As The Hottest Month On Record" No. It is responding to data supplied. HOW can you not see that?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #302 July 5, 2014 > It is responding to data supplied. "The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot necessarily be linked to climate change." Highlighted by RushMC. So I guess you'd have to take it up with him. (ooohh, denier fight!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #303 July 5, 2014 billvon > It is responding to data supplied. "The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot necessarily be linked to climate change." Highlighted by RushMC. So I guess you'd have to take it up with him. (ooohh, denier fight!) I'm not a denier. I believe that humans are capable of impacting the earth's biosphere. I just am not convinced it is all a bad thing. I am also unsure of how much of an impact we can really have. I mean, isn't Manhattan supposed to be under water now? Aren't the polar ice caps supposed to be tropical paradise by now . . . thats what the scientists were saying 30 years ago . . . what makes you so sure they are right THIS TIME?Their track record is SOOOO consistently correct.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #304 July 5, 2014 turtlespeed ***> It is responding to data supplied. "The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot necessarily be linked to climate change." Highlighted by RushMC. So I guess you'd have to take it up with him. (ooohh, denier fight!) I'm not a denier. I believe that humans are capable of impacting the earth's biosphere. I just am not convinced it is all a bad thing. I am also unsure of how much of an impact we can really have. I mean, isn't Manhattan supposed to be under water now? Aren't the polar ice caps supposed to be tropical paradise by now . . . thats what the scientists were saying 30 years ago . . . what makes you so sure they are right THIS TIME?Can you provide a link to any serious scientific article that predicted either of those things? If not, I guess you are just into the strawman thing again.... 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
turtlespeed 212 #305 July 6, 2014 kallend ******> It is responding to data supplied. "The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot necessarily be linked to climate change." Highlighted by RushMC. So I guess you'd have to take it up with him. (ooohh, denier fight!) I'm not a denier. I believe that humans are capable of impacting the earth's biosphere. I just am not convinced it is all a bad thing. I am also unsure of how much of an impact we can really have. I mean, isn't Manhattan supposed to be under water now? Aren't the polar ice caps supposed to be tropical paradise by now . . . thats what the scientists were saying 30 years ago . . . what makes you so sure they are right THIS TIME?Can you provide a link to any serious scientific article that predicted either of those things? If not, I guess you are just into the strawman thing again. You accept NASA, don't you?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #306 July 6, 2014 Quote James E. Hansen... Compared to several papers I've read, Hansen's papers don't impress me. He's more of a salesman these days, IMO.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #307 July 6, 2014 StreetScoobyQuote James E. Hansen... Compared to several papers I've read, Hansen's papers don't impress me. He's more of a salesman these days, IMO. I was dealing in the past not today.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #308 July 7, 2014 turtlespeed *********> It is responding to data supplied. "The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot necessarily be linked to climate change." Highlighted by RushMC. So I guess you'd have to take it up with him. (ooohh, denier fight!) I'm not a denier. I believe that humans are capable of impacting the earth's biosphere. I just am not convinced it is all a bad thing. I am also unsure of how much of an impact we can really have. I mean, isn't Manhattan supposed to be under water now? Aren't the polar ice caps supposed to be tropical paradise by now . . . thats what the scientists were saying 30 years ago . . . what makes you so sure they are right THIS TIME?Can you provide a link to any serious scientific article that predicted either of those things? If not, I guess you are just into the strawman thing again. You accept NASA, don't you? The Washington Times is run by the Moonies, not by NASA. The Washington Times is not a serious scientific journal. Apparently you have nothing (as usual), but tried to palm off some rubbish on us.... 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 #309 July 7, 2014 kallend ************> It is responding to data supplied. "The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot necessarily be linked to climate change." Highlighted by RushMC. So I guess you'd have to take it up with him. (ooohh, denier fight!) I'm not a denier. I believe that humans are capable of impacting the earth's biosphere. I just am not convinced it is all a bad thing. I am also unsure of how much of an impact we can really have. I mean, isn't Manhattan supposed to be under water now? Aren't the polar ice caps supposed to be tropical paradise by now . . . thats what the scientists were saying 30 years ago . . . what makes you so sure they are right THIS TIME?Can you provide a link to any serious scientific article that predicted either of those things? If not, I guess you are just into the strawman thing again. You accept NASA, don't you? The Washington Times is run by the Moonies, not by NASA. The Washington Times is not a serious scientific journal. Apparently you have nothing (as usual), but tried to palm off some rubbish on us. So, you like NASA's manipulated data better? Cool Got it!"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 1,679 #310 July 7, 2014 rushmc ***************> It is responding to data supplied. "The GAO acknowledged in its video that any single weather event cannot necessarily be linked to climate change." Highlighted by RushMC. So I guess you'd have to take it up with him. (ooohh, denier fight!) I'm not a denier. I believe that humans are capable of impacting the earth's biosphere. I just am not convinced it is all a bad thing. I am also unsure of how much of an impact we can really have. I mean, isn't Manhattan supposed to be under water now? Aren't the polar ice caps supposed to be tropical paradise by now . . . thats what the scientists were saying 30 years ago . . . what makes you so sure they are right THIS TIME?Can you provide a link to any serious scientific article that predicted either of those things? If not, I guess you are just into the strawman thing again. You accept NASA, don't you? The Washington Times is run by the Moonies, not by NASA. The Washington Times is not a serious scientific journal. Apparently you have nothing (as usual), but tried to palm off some rubbish on us. So, you like NASA's manipulated data better? Cool Got it! Translation - you can't actually find any article in a serious scientific journal that supports your claim, so you are simply throwing dust in the air (again) in a lame attempt at distraction.... 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 #311 July 7, 2014 No translation needed NASA has been caught manipulating data again you support that dataSucks to be in your position"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
turtlespeed 212 #312 July 8, 2014 rushmc No translation needed NASA has been caught manipulating data again you support that dataSucks to be in your position Don't ruin his one itsy bitsy cop out road. He HATES that.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #313 July 8, 2014 Quote Cool HaHa. Was the pun intended? We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #314 July 8, 2014 I'll light a candle for you perfesser.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #315 July 8, 2014 rushmc No translation needed NASA has been caught manipulating data again you support that dataSucks to be in your position Translation - neither you nor turtle can actually find any article in a serious scientific journal that supports his claim, so you are simply throwing dust in the air (again) in a lame attempt at distraction.... 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
turtlespeed 212 #316 July 9, 2014 kallend ***No translation needed NASA has been caught manipulating data again you support that dataSucks to be in your position Translation - neither you nor turtle can actually find any article in a serious scientific journal that supports his claim, so you are simply throwing dust in the air (again) in a lame attempt at distraction. Can you find scientific peer reviewed document on the internet from the 70's?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #317 July 9, 2014 >Can you find scientific peer reviewed document on the internet from the 70's? The on line archives of Nature go back to 1950. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #318 July 9, 2014 turtlespeed ******No translation needed NASA has been caught manipulating data again you support that dataSucks to be in your position Translation - neither you nor turtle can actually find any article in a serious scientific journal that supports his claim, so you are simply throwing dust in the air (again) in a lame attempt at distraction. Can you find scientific peer reviewed document on the internet from the 70's? Yes. But apparently you can't find any that support your claim.... 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 #319 July 9, 2014 turtlespeed ******No translation needed NASA has been caught manipulating data again you support that dataSucks to be in your position Translation - neither you nor turtle can actually find any article in a serious scientific journal that supports his claim, so you are simply throwing dust in the air (again) in a lame attempt at distraction. Can you find scientific peer reviewed document on the internet from the 70's? One has to wonder what peer review really means when they approve of a paper that uses manipulated data to prove a preconceived position And then They block any paper with which they do not agree with regardless of the accuracy But it is their religion They will die defending it"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 1,679 #320 July 9, 2014 So you can't find any that support his claim either. His claim was just typical turtlespeed hot air.... 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 #321 July 10, 2014 kallend So you can't find any that support his claim either. His claim was just typical turtlespeed hot air. Oh there is plenty out there You got faith The definition of a religion"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 1,679 #322 July 10, 2014 rushmc*** So you can't find any that support his claim either. His claim was just typical turtlespeed hot air. Oh there is plenty out there Really? Funny, then, that neither of you can find any. Most likely explanation is that his claim is false.... 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 #323 July 10, 2014 kallend ****** So you can't find any that support his claim either. His claim was just typical turtlespeed hot air. Oh there is plenty out there Really? Funny, then, that neither of you can find any. Most likely explanation is that his claim is false. "Most likely"?Leaving a little wiggle not aren't we nowBut just so you know I am not looking. I don't need to as I am not working from a position of faith"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 1,679 #324 July 10, 2014 rushmc ********* So you can't find any that support his claim either. His claim was just typical turtlespeed hot air. Oh there is plenty out there Really? Funny, then, that neither of you can find any. Most likely explanation is that his claim is false. "Most likely"?Leaving a little wiggle not aren't we nowBut just so you know I am not looking. I don't need to as I am not working from a position of faith Ockham's Razor. If you had anything at all, you'd post it. You have nothing.... 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 #325 July 10, 2014 kallend ************ So you can't find any that support his claim either. His claim was just typical turtlespeed hot air. Oh there is plenty out there Really? Funny, then, that neither of you can find any. Most likely explanation is that his claim is false. "Most likely"?Leaving a little wiggle not aren't we nowBut just so you know I am not looking. I don't need to as I am not working from a position of faith Ockham's Razor. If you had anything at all, you'd post it. You have nothing. Most likely"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
