Las Vegas Advisor Menu
« LVA Forums « Vegas Free-for-All

Two Interesting Headlines related to Global Warming

hoops2
hoops2
Apr 13, 2015
3:32am
Block User
"There's a cure for narcissism, and it's called humility. You should try it,"

Coming from forky and his fake charts and half stories, that is pretty funny
forkushV
forkushV
Apr 13, 2015
5:39am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: hoops2
"There's a cure for narcissism, and it's called humility. You should try it,"

Coming from forky and his fake charts and half stories, that is pretty funny
The fake chart from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis or the fake chart from Moody's Analytics or the fake chart from the Federal Bureau of Investigation or...?

Please be specific!

chefantwon
chefantwon
Apr 14, 2015
9:15am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
chef, how narcissistic do you have to be for you to claim that scientific consensus is wrong? You probably couldn't pass a first week quiz in beginning statistics, calculus, geophysics, or climatology, and yet you feel yourself qualified to decide just which outlier scientists and almost scientists are correct, and to tell other scientists that they are wrong.

chef, most of the science deniers on the left and right are narcissists just like you. The evolution deniers cluelessly argue about moon dust and magnetic fields, the outlaw all GMO-ers use big words like RNA and DNA, and the anti-vaccine crazies cite lone discredited unscientific studies. And remember those who claimed that scientific consensus was wrong on the cancer-tobacco connection? How'd that work out?

But there's good news, chef. There's a cure for narcissism, and it's called humility. You should try it, since you obviously have so much to be humble about.


Seems like back in the 1970's there was a "consensus" of something called global cooling a new ice age. Now, we are 180 degrees out and they are talking about global warming. Gee what happened, Jupiter change its orbit or something?

I am not a scientist nor a climate person, however I DO remember reading stuff back in the 1970's talking about the climate during the time of the dinosaurs and before. The ice packs were non-existant and the world was completely devoid of man. Then 60 million years ago something happened that killed off the dinosaurs. No one really had an idea until the 1980's when scientists came up with a theory that an asteroid impact caused the dinosaurs demise.

This was just ONE event in the history of the Earth and how many conflicting theories were there about what killed off the dinosaurs? As one looks back at the sedimentary evidence, there are many such events and man was no where around.

Back in the 1800's a volcano named Mount Tambora exploded and the result was commonly known as a year without a summer. How much dust and ash was released to cause this, and has it ever happened before?
Seems the Earth had an answer, supervolcano's. Yellowstone for one which when it blows again, will lay down enough ash to severly impact the worlds food production and may cause a new ice age.

Again, I am NOT a scientist but I read and have a brain. Look up Forkie at that nice yellow ball you get daytime and heat from, do you really know what the solar output is going to be 100 years from now? How about a million years, or even 10 years from now? YOU don't and neither does any scientist.

I have mentioned just 3 things that can effect our climate, can you determine when each will occur? None of those 2000 scientists can, can you? I sure as hell can't.

narcissistic, my ass.

(edited Tambora resulted in a year with out a summer not Krakatoa)
forkushV
forkushV
Apr 14, 2015
10:25am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
chef, how narcissistic do you have to be for you to claim that scientific consensus is wrong? You probably couldn't pass a first week quiz in beginning statistics, calculus, geophysics, or climatology, and yet you feel yourself qualified to decide just which outlier scientists and almost scientists are correct, and to tell other scientists that they are wrong.

chef, most of the science deniers on the left and right are narcissists just like you. The evolution deniers cluelessly argue about moon dust and magnetic fields, the outlaw all GMO-ers use big words like RNA and DNA, and the anti-vaccine crazies cite lone discredited unscientific studies. And remember those who claimed that scientific consensus was wrong on the cancer-tobacco connection? How'd that work out?

But there's good news, chef. There's a cure for narcissism, and it's called humility. You should try it, since you obviously have so much to be humble about.


Seems like back in the 1970's there was a "consensus" of something called global cooling a new ice age...
Bullshit, according to the American Meteorological Association: "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then. [...] The survey identified only 7 articles indicating cooling compared to 44 indicating warming. Those seven cooling articles garnered just 12% of the citations."

So chef, I know you made that claim out of ignorance, but now that you've been schooled on it, the next time you say it, it will just be a lie. And you don't want to be a lying narcissist, do you?


chefantwon
chefantwon
Apr 14, 2015
10:46am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
chef, how narcissistic do you have to be for you to claim that scientific consensus is wrong? You probably couldn't pass a first week quiz in beginning statistics, calculus, geophysics, or climatology, and yet you feel yourself qualified to decide just which outlier scientists and almost scientists are correct, and to tell other scientists that they are wrong.

chef, most of the science deniers on the left and right are narcissists just like you. The evolution deniers cluelessly argue about moon dust and magnetic fields, the outlaw all GMO-ers use big words like RNA and DNA, and the anti-vaccine crazies cite lone discredited unscientific studies. And remember those who claimed that scientific consensus was wrong on the cancer-tobacco connection? How'd that work out?

But there's good news, chef. There's a cure for narcissism, and it's called humility. You should try it, since you obviously have so much to be humble about.


Seems like back in the 1970's there was a "consensus" of something called global cooling a new ice age...
Bullshit, according to the American Meteorological Association: "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then. [...] The survey identified only 7 articles indicating cooling compared to 44 indicating warming. Those seven cooling articles garnered just 12% of the citations."

So chef, I know you made that claim out of ignorance, but now that you've been schooled on it, the next time you say it will just be a lie. And you don't want to be a lying narcissist, do you?



According to the press at the time, that was the story. We were going to be up to our arm pits in ice.

linky
Poptech
Poptech
Apr 14, 2015
12:23pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
According to the press at the time, that was the story. We were going to be up to our arm pits in ice.

linky

This is more comprehensive:

1970s Global Cooling Alarmism
forkushV
forkushV
Apr 14, 2015
1:29pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
chef, how narcissistic do you have to be for you to claim that scientific consensus is wrong? You probably couldn't pass a first week quiz in beginning statistics, calculus, geophysics, or climatology, and yet you feel yourself qualified to decide just which outlier scientists and almost scientists are correct, and to tell other scientists that they are wrong.

chef, most of the science deniers on the left and right are narcissists just like you. The evolution deniers cluelessly argue about moon dust and magnetic fields, the outlaw all GMO-ers use big words like RNA and DNA, and the anti-vaccine crazies cite lone discredited unscientific studies. And remember those who claimed that scientific consensus was wrong on the cancer-tobacco connection? How'd that work out?

But there's good news, chef. There's a cure for narcissism, and it's called humility. You should try it, since you obviously have so much to be humble about.


Seems like back in the 1970's there was a "consensus" of something called global cooling a new ice age...
Bullshit, according to the American Meteorological Association: "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then. [...] The survey identified only 7 articles indicating cooling compared to 44 indicating warming. Those seven cooling articles garnered just 12% of the citations."

So chef, I know you made that claim out of ignorance, but now that you've been schooled on it, the next time you say it will just be a lie. And you don't want to be a lying narcissist, do you?



According to the press at the time, that was the story. We were going to be up to our arm pits in ice.

linky
Oh yeah, at the time those same magazines were exclaiming that Farrah's hair was just fab. Not exactly peer-reviewed scientific journals, were they? But your claim that scientific consensus was on the side of global cooling is just ignorant, in the face of evidence from the American Meteorological Association.

And now that you've been schooled, if you say it again, you're just lying. (And as always, if you think you have better judgement on this than the folks from the American Meteorological Association, you're just a narcissist.)
hoops2
hoops2
Apr 14, 2015
11:20pm
Block User
Chef seems to have a lot of scientific studies in his link from the 70's talking about global cooling. forky comes up with a study 40 years later saying it was wrong. Will there be studies 40 years from now talking about the myth of global warming?
forkushV
forkushV
Apr 15, 2015
12:03am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: hoops2
Chef seems to have a lot of scientific studies in his link from the 70's talking about global cooling...
Seems? It either does or it doesn't, right?

(Spoiler alert: It doesn't.)

chefantwon
chefantwon
Apr 20, 2015
10:10am
Block User
Really Forkie, why are scientists looking at ice when rocks generally out date it by several billion years?

Oh Forkie, in the 70's there were 3 theories about the creation of the universe? How many times did they change over the centuries?

Why was the CO2 levels 100 times higher during the time of the dinosaurs?

Where was that Antarctic ice 3 billion years ago? How about 300 million years ago?

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now