Oh, you mean that wife that was too fucking cool to come out and meet the venerated AZGrizFan?Vidav wrote:The wife and I go to Whidbey Island regularly. We don't usually stop in Seattle but if there were a dinner available I'm sure we would stop.SeattleGriz wrote:
Bitch, that shit is ALWAYS on! You come to Seattle, please let me know. Anyone is always welcome to dinner at my house.
Yeah, that's her. People she has met:AZGrizFan wrote:Oh, you mean that wife that was too fucking cool to come out and meet the venerated AZGrizFan?Vidav wrote:
The wife and I go to Whidbey Island regularly. We don't usually stop in Seattle but if there were a dinner available I'm sure we would stop.
We live in Bothell. Not far from the ferries. I will send you my info via PM.Vidav wrote:The wife and I go to Whidbey Island regularly. We don't usually stop in Seattle but if there were a dinner available I'm sure we would stop.SeattleGriz wrote:
Bitch, that shit is ALWAYS on! You come to Seattle, please let me know. Anyone is always welcome to dinner at my house.
Jesus.D1B wrote:We're in the second week of 70-80's.mainejeff wrote:85 today in Bangor, Maine......might hit 90 tomorrow.
SeattleGriz wrote:Jesus.D1B wrote:
We're in the second week of 70-80's.
I don't say that very often, but in this case may the Good Lord forgive me from here on out.
Dude, you need to find a new religion to bash, because you are not only making a fool of yourself, but making your family look bad.
This aint college ball. Give up the self inflated grandiosity.
Your family must be proud.
Bring lots of cash, V.SeattleGriz wrote:We live in Bothell. Not far from the ferries. I will send you my info via PM.Vidav wrote:
The wife and I go to Whidbey Island regularly. We don't usually stop in Seattle but if there were a dinner available I'm sure we would stop.
Vidav wrote:Yeah, that's her. People she has met:AZGrizFan wrote:
Oh, you mean that wife that was too fucking cool to come out and meet the venerated AZGrizFan?
Grizo
Ursus (she really liked Ursus, cuz he has a job, and that worries me.)
Grizza
Pantherrob
People she has refused to meet:
AZ
D1B wrote:SeattleGriz wrote:
Jesus.
I don't say that very often, but in this case may the Good Lord forgive me from here on out.
Dude, you need to find a new religion to bash, because you are not only making a fool of yourself, but making your family look bad.
This aint college ball. Give up the self inflated grandiosity.
You're a drunk piece of shit retard creationist. 1:45 in the morning and you're "at work", drunk, at home, wasting your welfare check on creationism and denier threads.
Find a fucking job you loser.
SeattleGriz wrote:D1B wrote:
You're a drunk piece of shit retard creationist. 1:45 in the morning and you're "at work", drunk, at home, wasting your welfare check on creationism and denier threads.
Find a fucking job you loser.
I already used the family slam in my post. You need to use a different one.
The one where you tell me to go back to school and get an education is still available.
The "peer review" publication process is not what most people think it is. It is not an objective quality control process. The fact that something gets through "peer review" does not necessarily mean it is valid nor does the fact that something does not get through "peer review" necessarily mean it is not. It starts with the editors deciding whether or not they think something is interesting to them. Then a handful of people look at the manuscript.No one said that, as a matter of fact scientists are probably brutal with their cross examining of data through the peer review process.
Current theories of the causes and impact of global warming have been thrown into question by a new study which shows that during medieval times the whole of the planet heated up.
It then cooled down naturally and there was even a 'mini ice age'.
A team of scientists led by geochemist Zunli Lu from Syracuse University in New York state, has found that contrary to the ‘consensus’, the ‘Medieval Warm Period’ approximately 500 to 1,000 years ago wasn’t just confined to Europe.
In fact, it extended all the way down to Antarctica – which means that the Earth has already experience global warming without the aid of human CO2 emissions.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... z1qFb3a897" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No, you f'ing dumbass, quit hyperventilating and try f'ing reading.youngterrier wrote:BDK doesAZGrizFan wrote:
I don't believe anyone has argued the point of whether the climate is actually changing.
but seriously, I know this, but the debate is how not if, and I think there is good evidence to think we are at least partly responsible. What I don't like is dumbasses like BDK, whom have the science education of a 3rd grader trying to "refute" a credible theory with straw men and other falsehoods. Not once has he not used legitimate science as an argument, in fact he's only used falsehoods like "scientists said _______" (when the didn't) and essentially "Let me tell you about this science I don't understand" to make a point "point."
I prefer discussion Tman and SG have brought up, at least it's educational and thought provoking.
I never said there isn't any climate change. I've just stated that it hasn't been proven that there is man made global warming. And it hasn't been, despite what you cut and paste from some science journals.
Ah, begging the question I see. If you would actually read thing, perhaps you wound understand them. Considering it's a scientific fact that the causes (man-made or not) to increase temperature to cause climate change are volcanic activity, solar variations, orbital changes, and fluctuating ocean currents, there's good reason to think that man is responsible because A)solar variation has been consistent B) As has Volcanic activity and C) as has orbital changes.BDKJMU wrote:No, you f'ing dumbass, quit hyperventilating and try f'ing reading.youngterrier wrote: BDK does
but seriously, I know this, but the debate is how not if, and I think there is good evidence to think we are at least partly responsible. What I don't like is dumbasses like BDK, whom have the science education of a 3rd grader trying to "refute" a credible theory with straw men and other falsehoods. Not once has he not used legitimate science as an argument, in fact he's only used falsehoods like "scientists said _______" (when the didn't) and essentially "Let me tell you about this science I don't understand" to make a point "point."
I prefer discussion Tman and SG have brought up, at least it's educational and thought provoking.
I wholeheartedly concur.youngterrier wrote:No one said that, as a matter of fact scientists are probably brutal with their cross examining of data through the peer review process. It's no different in the Climate Change field, the thing is that we have a lot of neanderthals who are not scientists giving their input on the matter, when they have no idea about what exactly the controversy is.SeattleGriz wrote:
What do you think is more realistic? A scientist knowing they need to produce pro-global warming information, or someone who is willing to buck the trend to find themselves out on their own?
I find it simply fucking astounding how so many on this board believe the scientific community is some group of guys who just love to blow each other and agree with their findings. While it may be true in certain fields, it ain't so in the climate change field.
You fuck with my dollars and I will wreck you.
Okay, let's say everyone without a science degree shuts up. Oh look who has the consensus now? And you keep losing points whenever you compare me to Al......travelinman67 wrote:I wholeheartedly concur.youngterrier wrote:
No one said that, as a matter of fact scientists are probably brutal with their cross examining of data through the peer review process. It's no different in the Climate Change field, the thing is that we have a lot of neanderthals who are not scientists giving their input on the matter, when they have no idea about what exactly the controversy is.
Now, you, Al, Joe Romm, every ideologic Dem, 95% of the MSM, most Hollywood actors, and every bureaucrat who stands to benefit from the proposed leviathon of regulatory oppression concocted from this scheme can just shut the hell up.
Volcanic activity is consistent?youngterrier wrote:Ah, begging the question I see. If you would actually read thing, perhaps you wound understand them. Considering it's a scientific fact that the causes (man-made or not) to increase temperature to cause climate change are volcanic activity, solar variations, orbital changes, and fluctuating ocean currents, there's good reason to think that man is responsible because A)solar variation has been consistent B) As has Volcanic activity and C) as has orbital changes.BDKJMU wrote:
No, you f'ing dumbass, quit hyperventilating and try f'ing reading.
That leaves ocean currents, which are fluctuating because of the increase rate of the melting glaciers. What could cause this other than carbon emissions?
Bueller? Bueller?
youngterrier wrote:Ah, begging the question I see. If you would actually read thing, perhaps you wound understand them. Considering it's a scientific fact that the causes (man-made or not) to increase temperature to cause climate change are volcanic activity, solar variations, orbital changes, and fluctuating ocean currents, there's good reason to think that man is responsible because A)solar variation has been consistent B) As has Volcanic activity and C) as has orbital changes.BDKJMU wrote:
No, you f'ing dumbass, quit hyperventilating and try f'ing reading.
That leaves ocean currents, which are fluctuating because of the increase rate of the melting glaciers. What could cause this other than carbon emissions?
Bueller? Bueller?
In other words, temperatures are up, but volcanic activity is not up any more than the last few hundred years in terms of eruptions.AZGrizFan wrote:youngterrier wrote:
Ah, begging the question I see. If you would actually read thing, perhaps you wound understand them. Considering it's a scientific fact that the causes (man-made or not) to increase temperature to cause climate change are volcanic activity, solar variations, orbital changes, and fluctuating ocean currents, there's good reason to think that man is responsible because A)solar variation has been consistent B) As has Volcanic activity and C) as has orbital changes.
That leaves ocean currents, which are fluctuating because of the increase rate of the melting glaciers. What could cause this other than carbon emissions?
Bueller? Bueller?
Volcanic activity is consistent?
travelinman67 wrote:I wholeheartedly concur.youngterrier wrote:
No one said that, as a matter of fact scientists are probably brutal with their cross examining of data through the peer review process. It's no different in the Climate Change field, the thing is that we have a lot of neanderthals who are not scientists giving their input on the matter, when they have no idea about what exactly the controversy is.
Now, you, Al, Joe Romm, every ideologic Dem, 95% of the MSM, most Hollywood actors, and every bureaucrat who stands to benefit from the proposed leviathon of regulatory oppression concocted from this scheme can just shut the hell up.
wonderful responseBDKJMU wrote:youngterrier wrote:
Ah, begging the question I see. If you would actually read thing, perhaps you wound understand them. Considering it's a scientific fact that the causes (man-made or not) to increase temperature to cause climate change are volcanic activity, solar variations, orbital changes, and fluctuating ocean currents, there's good reason to think that man is responsible because A)solar variation has been consistent B) As has Volcanic activity and C) as has orbital changes.
That leaves ocean currents, which are fluctuating because of the increase rate of the melting glaciers. What could cause this other than carbon emissions?
Bueller? Bueller?
I would suggest you have your posts "peer reviewed", but then Klean and Opie have been scarce lately.youngterrier wrote:Ah, begging the question I see. If you would actually read thing, perhaps you wound understand them. Considering it's a scientific fact that the causes (man-made or not) to increase temperature to cause climate change are volcanic activity, solar variations, orbital changes, and fluctuating ocean currents, there's good reason to think that man is responsible because A)solar variation has been consistent B) As has Volcanic activity and C) as has orbital changes.BDKJMU wrote:
No, you f'ing dumbass, quit hyperventilating and try f'ing reading.
That leaves ocean currents, which are fluctuating because of the increase rate of the melting glaciers. What could cause this other than carbon emissions?
Bueller? Bueller?
Except for Sajak, that's a solid list of actors.D1B wrote:travelinman67 wrote:
I wholeheartedly concur.
Now, you, Al, Joe Romm, every ideologic Dem, 95% of the MSM, most Hollywood actors, and every bureaucrat who stands to benefit from the proposed leviathon of regulatory oppression concocted from this scheme can just shut the hell up.
You know you've knocked out a conk when they resort to bringing up "Hollywood!!"
Nice try you Edwardian Tub o' Lard.
Ben Stein?kalm wrote:Except for Sajak, that's a solid list of actors.D1B wrote:
You know you've knocked out a conk when they resort to bringing up "Hollywood!!"
Nice try you Edwardian Tub o' Lard.
Ok, so not really much of an actor but he and Kimmel were very good on "Win Ben Stein's Money"Vidav wrote:Ben Stein?kalm wrote:
Except for Sajak, that's a solid list of actors.
