Yet more record low temps

[drtom2005]

Yes, because we all know the BBC is a conservative media outlet. :) This would be the equivalent of Fox News endorsing President Obama.



So, my local weather man can't predict the weather tomorrow with any real accuracy, but these guys can predict that Global Warming is "pausing" and will resume in 2010?

Sounds like something to bet the house on. :)

Please answer my questions on the simulations. I would bet the one predicting cooler temperatures only looked at the recent trends(please remember the Earth is billion of years old. When I say recent, this means geologic time, not human time.) . Prove me wrong. As for the media deal, none of them tell the whole truth, because they do not have enough time or printing space. No, I do not trust any media outlet on any topic. I do my own research before I make a decision.

[mikesilvia]

Please answer my questions on the simulations. I would bet the one predicting cooler temperatures only looked at the recent trends. Prove me wrong.

I'm not your lab assistant. Do your own research. You ask questions at the end of all your posts. Maybe getting informed will go a long way in strengthening your arguments.

As for the media deal, none of them tell the whole truth, because they do not have enough time or printing space. No, I do not trust any media outlet on any topic. I do my own research before I make a decision.

You haven't done much research if you are asking me to post CO2 trends as they related to global warming.

I really don't see the need to post any new articles because the trenches have been dug. I could show a 5,000 year trend of cooling and I would be asked to post a 5 million year trend. I know the truth is that we will spend billions and pass Cap and Trade soon regardless of the facts. The Cherry Kool-Aid has been poured and the Democrats are choking it down.

[maccards44]

So, my local weather man can't predict the weather tomorrow with any real accuracy, but these guys can predict that Global Warming is "pausing" and will resume in 2010?

Sounds like something to bet the house on. :)

I LOVE IT - now the article you posted as "evidence" that this debate is over with you as the clear winner is now bunk because it disagrees with your preconcieved ideas.

You posted this article and wrote "checkmate" - yet now you mock the same article... so is it a "checkmate" or NOT "something to bet the house on"?

[drtom2005]

I'm not your lab assistant. Do your own research. You ask questions at the end of all your posts. Maybe getting informed will go a long way in strengthening your arguments.



You haven't done much research if you are asking me to post CO2 trends as they related to global warming.

I really don't see the need to post any new articles because the trenches have been dug. I could show a 5,000 year trend of cooling and I would be asked to post a 5 million year trend. I know the truth is that we will spend billions and pass Cap and Trade soon regardless of the facts. The Cherry Kool-Aid has been poured and the Democrats are choking it down.

Once again, you posted it as evidence and should know all of the information. When you asked me questions, I answered. You are exempt from doing your homework. I have to disprove your false information. Well done. Bravo.

[Yanksfan396]

I'm not your lab assistant.

Hate to digress, and I know I'm going to get slammed for this, but I can't help it:

[drtom2005]

Mike another article on your boy, Piers Corbyn. I have been looking for his method of predicting weather and he does not release his methods due to owning a private company. This is not science. You are trusting someone who does not tell others how he does it. He might as well be a magician. Your evidence is horrible, because it is not repeatable.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...g-denialis.php

Who is PiersCorbyn? What is Weatheraction? Guess what? He makes predictions about the weather, predictions that are sometimes accurate and sometimes inaccurate, and he doesn't make public his method. Why, he must be a reliable source on a scientific issue!

He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.

He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month.

Ah, he has a claim. Has he released any evidence? Nope. What will his evidence consist of? No one knows. Is this newsworthy? Yes. Why? Because Piers Corbyn is "so excited" about the claim he making, which the author of the BBC article has seen none of the evidence for.

If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.

If I dropped an apple, yet gravity did not pull the apple to the ground, that could revolutionize the whole subject. And you know what else is possible? Someone systematically refuting hundreds of thousands of peer-reviewed articles worth of research that argues for global warming (and, just to reiterate, almost no peer-reviewed scientific articles refuting it). Sure, it could happen. Why not? Also, it could rain frogs tomorrow.

[OnePimpTiger]

Mike another article on your boy, Piers Corbyn. I have been looking for his method of predicting weather and he does not release his methods due to owning a private company. This is not science. You are trusting someone who does not tell others how he does it. He might as well be a magician. Your evidence is horrible, because it is not repeatable.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...g-denialis.php

Who is PiersCorbyn? What is Weatheraction? Guess what? He makes predictions about the weather, predictions that are sometimes accurate and sometimes inaccurate, and he doesn't make public his method. Why, he must be a reliable source on a scientific issue!

He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.

He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month.

Ah, he has a claim. Has he released any evidence? Nope. What will his evidence consist of? No one knows. Is this newsworthy? Yes. Why? Because Piers Corbyn is "so excited" about the claim he making, which the author of the BBC article has seen none of the evidence for.

If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.

If I dropped an apple, yet gravity did not pull the apple to the ground, that could revolutionize the whole subject. And you know what else is possible? Someone systematically refuting hundreds of thousands of peer-reviewed articles worth of research that argues for global warming (and, just to reiterate, almost no peer-reviewed scientific articles refuting it). Sure, it could happen. Why not? Also, it could rain frogs tomorrow.

For someone who only considers fact and hard evidence and denounces biased opinions, you sure do base a lot of your beliefs on biased opinions from the concrete science of blogs...

[mikesilvia]

Hate to digress, and I know I'm going to get slammed for this, but I can't help it:

Ha! That made me burst out laughing!

[Yanksfan396]

Ha! That made me burst out laughing!

Good deal! Always nice to laugh in the middle of a good debate. Just couldn't see you as a Beaker, though.

[drtom2005]

For someone who only considers fact and hard evidence and denounces biased opinions, you sure do base a lot of your beliefs on biased opinions from the concrete science of blogs...

My man, I only use those blogs so other people can understand the evidence. I am not going to bore people with the articles. OPT have you gotten me your article's information. Do you have my questions answered yet? As for Mike's evidence, I look for Piers paper and it is not around. His evidence is not good unless it is published and replicated.