RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
So, let's see if I get this right. Some moonbat screams we have Global warming. Then he sees data that shows that the Earth's temperatures has not been rising since the turn of the century, even though Al Gore swore that, by this time, you could melt lead on the sidewalk. So moonbat tries to say its because the ocean is absorbing all of the excess heat.
All the moonbat has to do now is explain why, if the ocean is absorbing vasts amount of heat, that we have more south pole sea ice. More heat = more ice = moonbat logic.
RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
(08-28-2014 10:30 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: So, let's see if I get this right. Some moonbat screams we have Global warming. Then he sees data that shows that the Earth's temperatures has not been rising since the turn of the century, even though Al Gore swore that, by this time, you could melt lead on the sidewalk. So moonbat tries to say its because the ocean is absorbing all of the excess heat.
All the moonbat has to do now is explain why, if the ocean is absorbing vasts amount of heat, that we have more south pole sea ice. More heat = more ice = moonbat logic.
Trying to talk logically with a leftist moonbat like Mach is a waste of time. He follows the party path straight down the line.
RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
(08-28-2014 10:32 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:
(08-28-2014 10:30 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: So, let's see if I get this right. Some moonbat screams we have Global warming. Then he sees data that shows that the Earth's temperatures has not been rising since the turn of the century, even though Al Gore swore that, by this time, you could melt lead on the sidewalk. So moonbat tries to say its because the ocean is absorbing all of the excess heat.
All the moonbat has to do now is explain why, if the ocean is absorbing vasts amount of heat, that we have more south pole sea ice. More heat = more ice = moonbat logic.
Trying to talk logically with a leftist moonbat like Mach is a waste of time. He follows the party path straight down the line.
A least we know who one of his "top 3" news sources is.
And I've already read this, as well as some of the rebuttals.
But what's really funny is this from your magazine article
Quote:But until this week, descriptions of how the sea might do this have largely come from computer models. Now, thanks to a study published in Science by Chen Xianyao of the Ocean University of China, Qingdao, and Ka-Kit Tung of the University of Washington, Seattle, there are data.
Previously there were no data to back up any claims. But you still called it science.
RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
If I read this correctly, the interesting thing to notice is that he's determined this is cyclical (30 year cycles). In essence, he says that about half of the warming in the latter part of the 20th Century was part of this cycle and not from human caused warming. Very interesting.
RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
Torch,
There is a reason those crack pot sites exist. The loony's are laughed out of any legtimate place. They hide in the recesses of the net so other crackpots can gather.
Submit one of those articles you post on here to a recognized Journal of Science. They couldn't gather an audience or be published.
RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
(08-28-2014 11:51 AM)Machiavelli Wrote: Torch,
There is a reason those crack pot sites exist. The loony's are laughed out of any legtimate place. They hide in the recesses of the net so other crackpots can gather.
Answer the question or STFU.
Quote:Submit one of those articles you post on here to a recognized Journal of Science. They couldn't gather an audience or be published.
You obviously don't even recognize a "Journal of Science" so it's clear you're talking out of your ass. Again.
08-28-2014 11:57 AM
Machiavelli
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity
Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
(08-28-2014 12:18 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: I did. They are made up of crack pots that would be laughed out of any legitimate room.
Says the guy who wanted us to rate weather on a 1-5 scale?
Or the one who thinks that the distance from a light bulb affects how much energy is radiated from it?
Or the one who questioned and ridiculed an NYU prof who wrote a book on biochemistry?
Journalists get laughed at by scientists for a reason. So I don't think your Economist authors would fare well in a room of scientists. BTW, so do HS teachers.
08-28-2014 12:22 PM
Advertisement
Machiavelli
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity
Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
RE: This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
How is that a lie? Have you shown a journal where you have been published? Don't remember that. You could have been published in a chemistry journal. I could believe that but I don't know. I'm certain you have never been published in any journal of geology or climate.
/
This is what a legitimate source looks like Torch.
