The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 32 of 54 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast
Results 311 to 320 of 540

Thread: Speaking of Global Warming

  1. #311
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,992

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry V View Post
    Rather than just shooting the messenger, perhaps you have some information to present to counter the scientific results presented in any of the three articles? It should be easy to refute the data presented in this "rag". If you prefer to post your arguments in the comments section for any of the articles, let us know so we can track your response there.
    Henry...you always assume the so called data you present is valid, if in fact it is not, why would anyone have any desire to show facts to the contrary....My point is that your logic is flawed! Instead of asking for contrary data, why not present data from a non bias source? Or maybe you have none!

  2. #312
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Detroit Lakes, MN
    Posts
    1,456

    Default

    Let’s take these one at a time.
    Quote Originally Posted by swampcollielover View Post
    Henry...you always assume the so called data you present is valid, if in fact it is not, why would anyone have any desire to show facts to the contrary...
    The short answer is.. .because credibly proving your side of the story is what adults do if they disagree about data or results of studies, especially scientists.

    The long answer includes... because the data and results cited in those newspaper articles come from scientific reports based primarily on empirical data and some modeling. If you or anyone questions the validity of the data or believes the results from the report have been presented in a biased fashion (i.e. “spun”) then it seems like it is your responsibility to support your point of view with evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by swampcollielover View Post
    ....My point is that your logic is flawed! Instead of asking for contrary data, why not present data from a non bias source? Or maybe you have none!
    Based on what you wrote, it seems like you are saying that you think the data I presented is biased but instead of providing evidence to support your view, your “logic” is that the burden is on me to find different data. Amazingly. In my world, if you accuse someone of presenting false information (e.g. lies) the burden is on you to expose it and defend your position.

    So I will ask again, if you think the studies cited in the articles I posted are biased, support your point of view with some evidence.

    You have already demonstrated clearly that you are unable to do this and prefer to respond to sound science by shooting the messenger, proclaiming the data is flawed/biased while presenting no evidence, throwing out personal attacks, and by conveniently forgetting to ever present any credible evidence to support your position.
    You know like you did in post #45
    Henry V. 1.. Looking at data from 2009 proves nothing try 100 or 200 years. 2. The source you quote is a Governmental Org. Which means the data is "suspect" ! Another " low information voter" Time to wake up and do your own fact gathering instead of using CNN for information!
    Or in post #48
    Henry V ...you know as well as I do that much of the base data gathered on Global Warming and Carbon Dioxide was shall we say manipulated to support the original hypothesis. This is fact...Junk science has been the trademark of the Democratic Party for many years. In the 70's it was Global cooling, then came Global warming.....now that theses aren't working out Gore and the boys are talking Global Climate Change....the way we all tell when a Democrat is telling a lie is when he is talking!
    Or in post #65:
    Henry V, just curious...you seem to be real good at cut and pasting data and then telling us what it means...what qualifies you to read and understand this data? I smell a "low information" voter...
    Followed by post #71
    JD...the guy seems to have a one track mind....Poopy! Possible he if full of the stuff! But does confirm his liberal thinking doesn't...
    And then after a direct responses from me you said in post #83
    Henry V....I grow tired of your babble and the so called scientific "data". Like most Liberal Progressives, you only read what you want to read, hear what you want to hear and believe what you want to believe...therefore my time is wasted with you!
    In post #95 you finally tried to present some evidence to support your point of view and then you waited all of 20 minutes to make post#97 claiming victory, playing the “those scientists are in it for the money” and “junk science” cards without presenting any evidence
    Zeus3925, Henry V, Golddogs, and other confused or liberals on Climate change...the two posts above give the 'current' facts about climate change in that the research and related data is not conclusive and does not verify anything....it is all Junk Science! Al Gore along with the Bias Media have created this problem and they are driving it because it sells and money can be made...nothing more!
    You then posted in #99
    Hey zenu3925...Glad you saw my post.....facts are hard to face sometimes! Like most Lib's your only place to go when presented with facts is name calling.... Which Union trained and brainwashed you?
    I directly countered what you stated in posts 95 and 99 and pointed out exactly why the so called data and conclusions that you presented were flawed.
    You did not respond to my evaluation of your post but instead did another victory dance in post #116

    Gerry....you nailed them again! I noticed after you posted these facts and data, none of the 'Tree Hugger' egg-heads came back with any comments!
    Then in my response to my post directed to Gerry you posted in #126
    my science is better thAn your science......???!!! Nothing new here we all beleive what we beleive....so move on!
    In post #187 you again regurgitated the information that you posted earlier in #95 that was directly refuted. I called you on this and you responded in #173 with

    HV....like most tree hugging nuts, you quote so called 'science' and then when someone points to research that disagrees with your science...you claim they are into propaganda....the fallacy in your assumption is that your so called scientist's are making a living putting out this data (as tainted as it may be) and my guy is making nothing....follow the money.....the science behind global warming is in fact tainted...do your own research and stop looking to prove your own hypothesis!
    I could post a bunch more, but your record is clear, consistent, and quite entertaining.

    Though I did find post #308 interesting too:
    This is a key tactic used by Liberals and others who live in 'feel good no logic-land':

    ...if the facts don't support your theory, just redefine the definition. (e.g....1970's = Global Cooling......(Since Al Gore)....Global Warming...now moving to Climate Change.

    This Liberal tactic used by Liberals, is described and documented by Thomas Sewell in his book, Vision of the Anointed! A book all clear thinking Americans should read
    Yep, you must be a legend in your own clear thinking mind, you have clearly demonstrated that I am the one living in a feel-good no logic land, have presented no facts to support my point of view, and can only resort to name calling.

    Maybe a slight revision of your first statement referenced way up above explains why you never present any evidence to support your point of view.
    You always assume the so called data I present is invalid, if in fact it is not, why would anyone have any desire to show facts to the contrary.
    Last edited by Henry V; 01-09-2014 at 11:49 PM.

  3. #313
    Senior Member zeus3925's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    West Twin Cities Metro, MN
    Posts
    2,171
    Zeus

    I don't want to feed an ugly dog!

  4. #314
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,735

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zeus3925 View Post
    Can't go in my "backyard" right now.

    It's under 2' of snow!!!

    Last edited by road kill; 01-10-2014 at 07:57 AM.

  5. #315
    Senior Member HuntClub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Washington County, Mn
    Posts
    154

    Default

    RK, tell us your secrets to battling the sinister Polar Vortex! Can anyone explain this Polar Vortex, looks nasty, I think we citizens should spend some hard earned money on studying this extreme climate phenomenon in depth.

  6. #316
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Pac NW
    Posts
    4,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by road kill View Post
    Can't go in my "backyard" right now.

    It's under 2' of snow!!!

    I find it humorous that the South Pole expedition is a group of scientists retracing the 1914 route of a previous exploration. Which BTW was sitting in open water while the new ship is frozen in place & it's rescue icebreaker was also stranded. The MSM says little about that as it would appear that the global warming/climate change enthusiasts are promoting another Y2K .
    __________________________

    Marvin S

    Everyone's friend is No One's friend

    Someday your life will flash before your eyes. It's your responsibility to make sure it's worth watching!

  7. #317
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntClub View Post
    RK, tell us your secrets to battling the sinister Polar Vortex! Can anyone explain this Polar Vortex, looks nasty, I think we citizens should spend some hard earned money on studying this extreme climate phenomenon in depth.
    Al Roker gives it a shot:

    http://www.salon.com/2014/01/08/stuf...ortex_is_real/
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  8. #318
    Senior Member HuntClub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Washington County, Mn
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Huh, winter, who knew?

  9. #319
    Senior Member swampcollielover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    MO
    Posts
    1,992

    Default

    All, as I looked back and read over some of these posts and those other earlier threads on the subject...I choose to leave this alone (no more posts on this topic, as it is no longer a valid debate) So as I leave it, I will go out of this thread with a joke on the general subject....

    A woman from Los Angeles who was a tree-hugging, Global Warming, liberal Democrat and an anti-hunter purchased a piece of timberland near Colville, WA. There was a large tree on one of the highest points in the tract. She wanted a good view of the natural splendor of her land so she started to climb the big tree.

    As she neared the top she encountered a spotted owl that attacked her. In
    her haste to escape, the woman slid down the tree to the ground and got
    many splinters in her crotch. In considerable pain, she hurried to a local
    ER to see a doctor. She told him she was an environmentalist, a Democrat,
    and an anti-hunter and how she came to get all the splinters.

    The doctor listened to her story with great patience and then told her to
    go wait in the examining room and he would see if he could help her. She
    sat and waited three hours before the doctor reappeared.


    The angry woman demanded, "What took so long?"

    He smiled and then told her,
    "Well, I had to get permits from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service,
    and the Bureau of Land Management before I could remove old-growth timber from a 'recreational area' so close to a waste treatment facility.


    I'm sorry, but due to Obama-care they turned you down."

  10. #320
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Detroit Lakes, MN
    Posts
    1,456

    Default

    Yep, interesting weather. 58 degrees warmer today than a couple days ago.

    The US weather was cold in 2013. http://www.usatoday.com/story/weathe...tures/4264237/

    but since the US is only 2% of the world's land surface, it does not tell the whole story as 2013 appears to be the fourth warmest on record from a global perspective.

    Of course, the right wing media was hailing this cold weather event as proof that climate change was complete bs (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...limate-change/ - watch the video clip)

    Interesting that breaking a few cold temperature records (if these government data are to be believed) are used to justify the position that climate change is not occurring and then the fact that there have been 700 all-time record highs set in the last decade in the US compared with only 74 all-time record lows is completely ignored.
    Last edited by Henry V; 01-10-2014 at 09:59 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •