Let’s take these one at a time.
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.
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 #45Or in post #48Henry 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 #65: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!Followed by post #71Henry 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...And then after a direct responses from me you said in post #83JD...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...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 evidenceHenry 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!You then posted in #99Zeus3925, 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!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.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?
You did not respond to my evaluation of your post but instead did another victory dance in post #116Then in my response to my post directed to Gerry you posted in #126Gerry....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!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 withmy science is better thAn your science......???!!! Nothing new here we all beleive what we beleive....so move on!I could post a bunch more, but your record is clear, consistent, and quite entertaining.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!
Though I did find post #308 interesting too: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.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
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.
Some links for all you backyard "scientists":
I don't want to feed an ugly dog!
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.
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!
"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)
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."
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.