Freeman Dyson, Global Warming Heretic

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That list of questions would be a lot more appealing if you didn't follow them by "hmmmmmmmm" as if the question itself proves a point.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good point.... I am a prick. I admit it. I'm much nicer in person. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
But in my defense 95% of MCGW Cultists are incapable of having of engaging in this debate civily towards me so I fall into the bad habit of mocking them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look at the bottom of this very thread -- each time you are civilly asked to provide some support for your assertions, you run away, call people sheep, or both.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is some pretty rich stuff from a poster whose best routine is the hit and run sniper one line unsupported post.

[CaptainFreedom]

Guys, guys it never happened! Those Jews are lying! The pictures? FAKES!

[Felix_Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
Look at the bottom of this very thread -- each time you are civilly asked to provide some support for your assertions, you run away, call people sheep, or both.


[/ QUOTE ]

You think he would provide an example of his assertion....such as:
I asserted those nitwits at NASA can't calculate the temperature correctly. But wait.....I did provide a link supporting my assertion. Hmmmmmm.....so much for his hysterical claim I NEVER support my assertions. With regards to this forum, I'm one of the few posters that actually supports my posts with link supporting my position....

[L'ennemi.]

[ QUOTE ]

But the point remains the same....water vapor is a MUCH MORE important greenhouse gas..... The <10% figure came from Tim Ball PhD. I don't know where his source data is. I am hoping a rich oil company will put me on their payroll so I can do this full time... Then people like yourself can claim I only say this things because "Big Oil" pay me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have nothing about people going against mainstream science. But anyone using this kind of arguments has little credibility....
Why? Just a small hint: Every scientist who defends MCGW
is perfectly aware of the role of water vapor as a greenhouse gaz.
But I'm sure your argumentation would convince the average Joe just like Al Gore's movie did. It does not make it good, even though it probably makes you feel good when you've proven your friends that 95% of the scientific community is stupid.

[Exsubmariner]

Perhaps you could educate this board about a proper argument?

[Felix_Nietzsche]

I don't claim to be a scientist....
I claim to be an educated man who understands the scientific method and I know when this process is not being followed....and I'm not alone in this thinking.

There is not *ONE* MCGW 'scientist' who can answer all the questions in my challenge. ZERO, NADA, No One.... Perhaps it is time to stop accepting being spoon-fed baby food and look at the information yourself. This is not some 9/11 conspiracy crap.....when their arguments are examined, they fall to pieces.... Only govt money keeps these people afloat. Their research would NEVER pass muster in the private sector....

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That list of questions would be a lot more appealing if you didn't follow them by "hmmmmmmmm" as if the question itself proves a point.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good point.... I am a prick. I admit it. I'm much nicer in person. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
But in my defense 95% of MCGW Cultists are incapable of having of engaging in this debate civily towards me so I fall into the bad habit of mocking them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look at the bottom of this very thread -- each time you are civilly asked to provide some support for your assertions, you run away, call people sheep, or both.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is some pretty rich stuff from a poster whose best routine is the hit and run sniper one line unsupported post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol. My own ranting stalker. Cool.

I think anyone who haunts these message boards would quickly assess your characterization to be false.

[qwnu]

[ QUOTE ]
There is not *ONE* MCGW 'scientist' who can answer all the questions in my challenge. ZERO, NADA, No One.....when their arguments are examined, they fall to pieces....

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you at all open to the possibility that you are just wrong about everything?

I mean, seriously, the above is a statement of breathtaking hubris, and you make them all the time. You must recognize this, even if you believe that you are right. But your attitude suggests that your position is one of closed-minded ideology rather than an open-minded search for the truth. You seem to have convinced yourself that no honest person could possibly disagree with your conclusions, and you routinely belittle your opponents as intellectually deficient "nitwits" or mindless "cultists". This just doesn't leave any room for honest debate, although I applaud those who continue to try and engage you regardless.

But here's my question for you: suppose I am able to gather 12 leading climate scientists (from leading universities, decades of experience, published in prestigious journals, etc.), the very best that the MCGW "cult" has to offer, and they agree to meet with you in a closed-door session for 12 hours. They answer all your questions and explain everything slowly and carefully. Is there any scenario you can possibly imagine which would result in you coming out of that room with the realization that you have just been looking at this whole issue incorrectly, and now you finally understand what they are all talking about, and you get it?

If the answer is yes, then I think a little more humility is in order. If the answer is no, just say so, and stop expecting to be given any serious consideration.

Edit: Please note I'm not necessarily saying you are wrong about anything. Also, if you really don't see where I'm coming from, go back and read all 20(!) of your posts in this thread as a disinterested observer and ask yourself what you would think of their author.

[Felix_Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
the above is a statement of breathtaking hubris, and you make them all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the subject where I display my hubris....
With regard to the MCGW Cult....it is like shooting fish in a barrel. These people may have PhDs but they are not particularly smart and their arguments are easy to dissect if you have a basic knowledge of science..... Science is about evidence.... The typical MCGW scientist is a liar and they can't support their outrageous claims.... I have an extremely low opinion of these scientists so I have little patience and no respect for these people. My favorite example of a scumbad MCGW scientist is Michael Mann.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael...28scientist%29
This man's research on tree rings led him to publish his infamous "hockey stick" graph. A graph showing a flat temperature line then a big increase in temperature when the industrial age began. The problem was his research was a lie. He dropped the data on the Medieval Warming Period and when two amateur mathemticians (McIntyre/McKitrick) from Canada busted him on this.

Then these men discovered his publish research could NOT be replicated. Mann then explained he used "mathematical algorythms" to massage the data. McI/McK asked for these "mathemtical algorythms" so they could validate whether his results could be duplicated.....Michael Mann refused.

STOP RIGHT HERE.
He REFUSED to publish a FULL methodology. STOP! And when he was busted HE REFUSED to give it. STOP! Let this sink in.....

Try this is a freshman biological lab class and you lose a letter grade. In the world of science, this is unheard of. REAL SCIENTISTS publish research with detailed methodology sections so that others scientists can perform peer reviews and replicate their results.

I am free to call Michael Mann a fraud all day long without worry of being sued. Because if he ever sued me, I could compel him to provide me with this mysterious "mathematical algoythms" via discovery and expose him as the fraud he truly is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
Here are some money quotes:
"The report was not subject to formal peer review"
"Overall, the committee believes that Mann’s assessments that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade of the millennium and that 1998 was the hottest year of the millennium cannot be supported by his analysis."
*The wiki article is actually quite kind to Mann because they don't make it clear that he STILL refuses to release his "mathematical algorythms".

Ask yourself this:
If you are measuring the temprature of the last 2000 years....why would you omit data from one of the hottest periods in North American, Europe, and perhaps the world? This was a period when Greenland was green and the Vikings could grow crops. Why omit this data? Can you answer this question?

[ QUOTE ]
But here's my question for you: suppose I am able to gather 12 leading climate scientists (from leading universities, decades of experience, published in prestigious journals, etc.), the very best that the MCGW "cult" has to offer, and they agree to meet with you in a closed-door session for 12 hours. They answer all your questions and explain everything slowly and carefully.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well I know enough about the subject where I know with certainty they can NOT explain everything that I would ask them. So your fantasy scenario is moot. E.g. With regard to the variable energy output from the sun, they have ZERO knowlege of what this data is 20,000 years ago when the ice ag occurred. Unless they have this data....they can NOT eliminate the sun as a culprit behind major climate changes. It was until 1975 that we had orbiting satellites in space to collect this data.

You response indicates you are a blind follower and believe anything a person with a PhD says. You accuse me of being close-minded but in truth you are the close-minded one and are not open to the possibility these people are frauds.

It does not escape my notice you seek to accuse me of close-mindedness while ignoring my arguments against the MCGW Cult. If my arguments are so weak....then you should be able to smash them on this forum.....Yes? Instead you seek to attack my way of thinking rather than my arguments. Perhaps my snide, loathing, and disrespectful attitiude towards these MCGW 'scientists' turns you off. Yes? If so my I suggest you try to ignore the messenger and concentrate on the message.....

[Felix_Nietzsche]

Typical....