The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby Animavore » Tue Sep 05, 2017 3:59 pm

Notice also that Evans, who doubts global warming altogether, contradicts the Danish guy, who blames cosmic rays altogether. Amazing how the denialist can hold mutually exclusive positions at once while the scientists remain consistent. It's like the denialists are just throwing out any random idea, doesn't matter, as long as it leads to denying the science.
User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
 
Posts: 35508
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby mistermack » Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:09 pm

You love your blogs don't you. How many degrees have you got?
Did you ever work for six years in a national greenhouse office?

Climate science has all sorts of elements in it, and physics and statistics and maths are right up there.

But you wouldn't know that.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
User avatar
mistermack
 
Posts: 14372
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby Animavore » Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:24 pm

You're such a massive dope who constantly shoots yourself in the foot.

mistermack wrote:
Science is a very mushy concept. Mathematics is a very precise part of science. Physics is a very precise science generally, but does involve uncertainty.
Weather science is very imprecise, but can make reasonably accurate predictions, which become far less accurate, with each day into the future that you try to predict. But it does have some history, of predictions coming true, and improving with time.

Climate science is brand new, in comparison to all of these, and makes no predictions that everyone agrees on.



You definitely seem to suggest here that climate science and physics are two separate things.

And yes, I'm aware climate science has elements of physics, statistics, maths, chemistry, and so much more, I mentioned this loads of times as a weakness in your conspiracy theory but you never reply or acknowledge - you think that 10s of thousands of people from this wide array of fields are all lying for some sort of paycheque, rather than the odd mavericks who also just happens to work in lucrative positions in institutes funded by The Carthage Foundation, Chevron, and Exxonmobil who are. It's why you're laughed at.
User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
 
Posts: 35508
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby Animavore » Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:29 pm

Of course there may be a reason people go against established science in favour of minority positions. They need to feel unique.
User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
 
Posts: 35508
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby Animavore » Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:38 pm

Anyway, all this gish galloping is just deflection from the topic at hand, which is denialist and liar, Steve Crowder's, humiliating act of cowardice. It started when MM couldn't defend Crowder, so started throwing out off topic, whacky, and mutually exclusive theories like squid ink. I'll post more here if any new developments or debates arise.

Don't have the time for arguing with people who are wrong on the internet these days. I have a date tonight, with, like, a real woman. I'm sure the rest will pick at the bones. ;)
User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
 
Posts: 35508
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby Rum » Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:23 pm

Animavore wrote:Of course there may be a reason people go against established science in favour of minority positions. They need to feel unique.


Well there are other reasons too I think. Fear of what the implications of it are if climate change runs away with itself. And then of course there are vested interests.

I don't understand the evidence in full. I understand the actual theory well enough but of course I have not read ALL the evidence. Given that I have to rely on people I trust to inform me - as we all do in some areas where are knowledge is lacking. I go with the consensus therefore and there are even 'consensuses of consensuses'! (here for example: https://www.skepticalscience.com/global ... ediate.htm) which are around 97% plus mark. Sounds good enough to me.

To disbelieve that impressive collection of experts I too would need to be an expert - and an expert who can argue against pretty overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Rum's Second Law of thermodynamics: Everything eventually turns to shit.
User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
 
Posts: 31973
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby mistermack » Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:52 pm

Animavore wrote: I have a date tonight, with, like, a real woman. I'm sure the rest will pick at the bones. ;)

Enjoy your date.

They are very like a real woman these days, so I'm told. :D
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
User avatar
mistermack
 
Posts: 14372
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby Animavore » Sat Sep 23, 2017 3:00 pm

While we wait for the Crowder rematch, enjoy another climate denialist get a pummelling.

User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
 
Posts: 35508
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.

Re: The Great Climate Debate: Potholer vs Steve Crowder.

Postby Animavore » Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:14 pm

And still the lies flood in.

User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
 
Posts: 35508
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.

Previous

Return to Science, Technology & Environment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests