The bats

Pages:
1
…
6
7

The bats; under my eaves
Tweet Topic Started: Jul 25 2011, 07:52 PM (2,839 Views)
Big Richard	Aug 16 2011, 06:45 PM Post #181
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	oh well, it was basically articles showing how dragon was making ridiculous claims based off the emails which have been misinterpreted and blown out of proportion.



Vondongo	Aug 16 2011, 06:55 PM Post #182
Moo. Posts: 5,434 Group: Member Member #130 Joined: October 15, 2008	I don't understand. How did discussion about bats turn into...well...this?



Incog	Aug 16 2011, 08:39 PM Post #183
CHEERIO! Posts: 21,769 Group: French Member #6 Joined: December 13, 2007	gs Aug 10 2011, 01:06 PM for the planet, for other species, even for their own species all animals are better than humans yeah. this i think
	Black tulip Tribute to the the greatest of the great.


DragonLegend	Aug 17 2011, 01:19 AM Post #184
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	_Saladin_ Aug 16 2011, 04:33 PM DragonLegend Aug 16 2011, 06:03 AM Try actually reading the articles. But I'm sure you have, actually. Sucks to admit your religion was a scam, doesn't it? I hate linking to articles other than to cite a source for a claim. It's lazy because anything he says will just be dismissed because he "didn't read the article properly". It's basically a cop out. I specified which parts of each article I wanted him to read. He completely ignored it and played dumb after I confronted him about it.



Big Richard	Aug 17 2011, 01:41 AM Post #185
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	DragonLegend Aug 17 2011, 01:19 AM _Saladin_ Aug 16 2011, 04:33 PM DragonLegend Aug 16 2011, 06:03 AM Try actually reading the articles. But I'm sure you have, actually. Sucks to admit your religion was a scam, doesn't it? I hate linking to articles other than to cite a source for a claim. It's lazy because anything he says will just be dismissed because he "didn't read the article properly". It's basically a cop out. I specified which parts of each article I wanted him to read. He completely ignored it and played dumb after I confronted him about it. and I explained why they're useless articles because all 3 of them are based off the emails which have already been explained how they were misinterpreted by the sources I linked to you and even gave you excerpts from to make it simple but that you simply dismissed as "AGW propaganda" which is typical of someone in denial. The second article is also highly biased and not worth reading. The third article has only one thing supporting your position and its the claims of a single scientist expressing skepticism of the 'excuses' from the other scientist, which isn't 'evidence' of anything.



DragonLegend	Aug 17 2011, 02:17 AM Post #186
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	What nonsense. More proof that you're either a shameless liar or profoundly ignorant of the AGW scandals. The Times article has nothing to do with the e-mails. It's about the CRU admitting they don't have their raw data, which if you knew anything about science you would know renders their entire conclusion utterly meaningless. The second article quotes a few e-mails (which they admit are true) showing how the AGW scam artists silenced dissent in the scientific community, thus exposing what the mythical 'scientific consensus' was all about. The third one is about the CRU chief admitting, among other things (I suggest those who are interested in scientific facts and not religion take the time to read them), that there's been no warming for at least the past dozen years, despite rising CO2 levels, thus rendering the "More CO2 = higher temperature" basis of the AGW argument completely false. But go on, keep showing your agenda. Gotta keep fighting for your goddess Gaia.



Big Richard	Aug 17 2011, 02:35 AM Post #187
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	DragonLegend Aug 17 2011, 02:17 AM What nonsense. More proof that you're either a shameless liar or profoundly ignorant of the AGW scandals. The Times article has nothing to do with the e-mails. It's about the CRU admitting they don't have their raw data, which if you knew anything about science you would know renders their entire conclusion utterly meaningless. The second article quotes a few e-mails (which they admit are true) showing how the AGW scam artists silenced dissent in the scientific community, thus exposing what the mythical 'scientific consensus' was all about. The third one is about the CRU chief admitting, among other things (I suggest those who are interested in scientific facts and not religion take the time to read them), that there's been no warming for at least the past dozen years, despite rising CO2 levels, thus rendering the "More CO2 = higher temperature" basis of the AGW argument completely false. But go on, keep showing your agenda. Gotta keep fighting for your goddess Gaia. LMFAO "The revised figures were kept, but the originals � stored on paper and magnetic tape � were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building." omg omg revised??!?!?! they obviously falsified it and hid the evidence har har look at that excuse!! stupid tree huggers. Obviously their conclusion is meaningless because all they have is data lmao what noobs. as for 'silencing dissent' http://mediamatters.org/research/200912180017 sounds like your conspiracy is unraveling to be nothing more than assumptions and exaggerations. as for the recent warming : "He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not. He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no �statistically significant� warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend." OHHH CLEAR PROOF HAHA I KNEW IT, STOOPID SCIENTISTS HURHUR HURH BRB GOING TO MY HUMMER NOW



Big Richard	Aug 17 2011, 02:37 AM Post #188
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	honestly if this is your "clear evidence" and if those links (one of them being HIGHLY biased and annoying to read) are your primary sources of "evidence" then I'll say it again, get off the internet and read something educational please. You're embarrassing yourself trying to act as if you have some secret knowledge when the rest of the world can so simply dismiss your claims with proof showing what they really are - groundless, fear-mongering conspiracy theories.



DragonLegend	Aug 17 2011, 06:46 PM Post #189
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	You don't know much about science, do you? I have no interest in discussing facts with a true believer.



The_Fry_Cook_of_Doom	Aug 17 2011, 06:48 PM Post #190
:OOOOOOOOOOOOMAAANN Posts: 18,587 Group: A414A Member Member #35 Joined: January 11, 2008	I know enough about science to know that many of the effects of Global Warming are largely conjectural.
	Jam It's okay to be mad at your fiends sometimes


Big Richard	Aug 18 2011, 06:59 AM Post #191
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	dragon I'm simply looking at the facts and the "evidence" behind your skepticism is non-existent. I asked for the evidence that this is all just one big conspiracy and you failed to provide. Its hilarious you had nothing left to say so you crawled back to your safe zone.



Incog	Aug 19 2011, 08:20 AM Post #192
CHEERIO! Posts: 21,769 Group: French Member #6 Joined: December 13, 2007	http://www.ecorazzi.com/2011/08/17/peta-launching-porn-site-for-the-plight-of-animals/ There, how's that for relevance?
	Black tulip Tribute to the the greatest of the great.


The_Fry_Cook_of_Doom	Aug 19 2011, 08:43 AM Post #193
:OOOOOOOOOOOOMAAANN Posts: 18,587 Group: A414A Member Member #35 Joined: January 11, 2008	Sounds like it'll have beastiality.
	Jam It's okay to be mad at your fiends sometimes


DragonLegend	Aug 19 2011, 08:45 AM Post #194
Field Marshal Posts: 15,575 Group: Member Member #40 Joined: January 19, 2008	Big Richard Aug 18 2011, 06:59 AM dragon I'm simply looking at the facts and the "evidence" behind your skepticism is non-existent. I asked for the evidence that this is all just one big conspiracy and you failed to provide. Its hilarious you had nothing left to say so you crawled back to your safe zone. I gave you more than enough evidence. You're disingenuous. I'm not going to waste my time with you.



Big Richard	Aug 19 2011, 06:41 PM Post #195
Gay People Read This. Posts: 5,323 Group: World's Finest Member #113 Joined: July 26, 2008	DragonLegend Aug 19 2011, 08:45 AM Big Richard Aug 18 2011, 06:59 AM dragon I'm simply looking at the facts and the "evidence" behind your skepticism is non-existent. I asked for the evidence that this is all just one big conspiracy and you failed to provide. Its hilarious you had nothing left to say so you crawled back to your safe zone. I gave you more than enough evidence. You're disingenuous. I'm not going to waste my time with you. You gave me conspiracy theories, not evidence.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)

Create a free forum in seconds. Learn More · Register for Free
« Previous Topic · General chat · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
6
7