Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Bogus Science (Score 1) 421

does nothing to deal with the basic claims.

Anyone who reads wuwt knows this is complete bullshit.

Also, He has published. If your so willing pass judgment on another Where the fuck is your published research countering such?

Seems to me your guilty or your own accusation.

Comment Re:Sure, Al Gore may have INVENTED it (Score -1, Flamebait) 238

For some reason /. hates Al Gore.

Al Gore is the Dems version of Dear Leader and is full of fail.

One of the most technically literate people in office.

Wonders why someone so technically literate had to fake his c02 experiment
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/18/replicating-al-gores-climate-101-video-experiment-shows-that-his-high-school-physics-could-never-work-as-advertised/

And of course we have his Jan 26th, 2006 'end of the world' prediction.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2004/10/al-gores-doomsday-countdown.html

Submission + - Chevron Bites Back (wizbangblog.com)

sanzibar writes: Chevron filed a RICO lawsuit against those behind the Ecuadorian case including: the lead attorney Steven Donziger; Stratus Consulting; and Maest. As part of their lawsuit, Chevron obtained through discovery, outtakes from a documentary film called “Crude” that show Donziger and Maest colluding to ignore their own scientific findings and make up some new unsubstantiated claims .

Details of the RICO pleading can be found here:
http://www.chevron.com/documents/pdf/ecuador/StampedComplaint.pdf

Idle

Submission + - Photos capture wind turbine bursting into flames (news.stv.tv)

sanzibar writes: A wind turbine went up in flames as gust of up to 160mph battered parts of Scotland.

Mr McMahon, who captured the spectacular fire in photos, added: "I didn’t hear any explosion or anything, but my wife shouted for me to come down and see the fire.

Comment Re:2020 (Score 1) 469

Ha. cult boy - echo of lies. Lay off the crack pipe!

Its so evident your claim of being a former "skeptic" is such bullshit. If you were, you would understand at least something about the science, would never have claimed co2 is detrimental to plant life and you most certainly would not ignore the thousands of dissenting scientists.

Thats right - thousands of scientists call bullshit on the theory. Some were even part of the inner circle.

But you never were a "skeptic". You have always been a fanatic, kool aid drinking, brainwashed cult boy.

All you know is what they want you to know and you are just fine with that. So enjoy your little cult and remember - you will always be a major fail.

Comment Re:2020 (Score 1) 469

And this is why I call you cult boy. You are so mindlessly brainwashed you cant even see truth when it slaps you in the face.

You clearly have some issues and suffer psychotic delusions (eg. co2 detrimental to plants!)

big bad co2 huh. what a fucking dumb ass. bye bye cult boy.

Comment Re:2020 (Score 1) 469

oh and how about this one: http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=253

Paleo data cannot inform us *directly* about how the climate sensitivity (as climate sensitivity is defined). Note the stressed word

Quantifying climate sensitivity from real world data cannot even be done using present-day data, including satellite data. If you think that one could do better with paleo data, then you’re fooling yourself.

skeptic have been saying this all along. Unfortunately, your so called "scientist" can only admit this behind close doors. lmfao.

i have to start calling you fail boy. lol

Comment Re:2020 (Score 1) 469

But then I educated myself about the facts.
the consensus position of 97-99% of all climate scientists

lmfao! Sock puppet drops the consensus myth. How many scientist participated? Hundreds, Thousands, Millions?
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/06/13/the-ipcc-consensus-on-climate-change-was-phoney-says-ipcc-insider/

Aside from that, the entire premise is absurd and runs counter to any scientific methodology.

Now crawl back under your rock. Your self humiliation is embarrassing to watch.

Comment Re:2020 (Score 1) 469

Your Mad!

The fact is we do not know why it has warmed. A sect of Scientists performed some amazing acrobatics with data and developed a theory that co2 is the cause. That is all you have pal and there are many scientists that reject this theory and many offering alternatives.

If you think co2 is detrimental to food production, you are a raging idiot. Even the pot growers know this one and use co2 to its full glory to produce that kind bud you crave. In fact, they use it at concentrations far greater than our current atmospheric readings. CO2 is steroids for plants. They thrive on it!

You are totally brainwashed and its sad really. So committed to something you know shit about and too damn lazy to actually investigate the crap you are being fed.

I think your generation refers to it as being IN the matrix.

Comment Re:2020 (Score 1) 469

Bullshit. The models have not been accurate. The exact opposite is true and its why they turn to rear projections. Smoke and mirrors cult boy.

The only fact is: We have/had warming. Nothing more or less. Why it warmed is all theory and you still cant establish if it is bad or not. Higher co2 results in higher food production- thats plant science 101 and its why greenhouses pump in tons of it every day. Cold is disastrous. Climate has never been stable and always changes. We now are seeing signs of cooling that even the ipcc is starting to recognize. Those are facts cult boy and nowhere in there do we see co2 having anything to do with temp aside from a circular collection of activists/reviewers pushing that theory. There are many other theories but you chose to latch on to a particular one and you don't even know why.

But I know why...your cult boy and you will believe anything they tell you.

Slashdot Top Deals

The flow chart is a most thoroughly oversold piece of program documentation. -- Frederick Brooks, "The Mythical Man Month"

Working...