I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Temp Refusing To Follow AGW Predictions [Pic+]

Hits: 7193 | Rating: (1.8) | Category: Science | Added by: 5Cats
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 21790 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 7:23:03 PM



The Sun has NOTHING to due with the Earth's temperature... those lines actually matching? Sheer coincidence!

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 21790 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 7:20:30 PM
Face it @Squrlz4: You drank the AGW Kool-Aid and asked for seconds...

I look with my own eyes and see:
CO2 was 10X present levels before humans
It was MUCH hotter before humans
It was MUCH colder before humans.

AGW (no matter how you disguise it's name) is just plain wrong.

Sure! The Earth might be getting warmer, it's highly possible! It has been doing so since the "little ice age" ffs...

NASA says: the "solar variance" (0.1% of the Sun's output) accounts for more difference in temperature than ALL the heat sources on Earth combined. Solar Variation

"The amount of solar radiation received at the outer surface of Earth's atmosphere averages 1366 watts/meter"
Sorry, how many Hiroshima Bombs per square meter per second is that? ffs...

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5968 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 6:16:03 PM
@5Cats:

it was just so... alarming! at how obvious these "logical errors" were...


Seriously, 5Cats? You're going to completely gloss over the three outright FALSEHOODS you've committed (the title of your submission and the two sentences of description), and instead focus on looking up the names of rhetorical techniques used by others?

Clue train: Propagating outright falsehoods is a lot more serious than employing any of the rhetorical devices on your chart.

Also: Clearly you aren't understanding the reason why climatologists, when writing papers for the public, express the additional energy absorbed by the Earth in terms of atomic bomb blasts. This is not fear-mongering, it's communication: the vast majority of the public has no idea what 268 terajoules of energy means--but they can readily understand that the energy of four Hiroshima atomic blasts is an enormous amount.

Get it now (I hope)?

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 21790 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 5:41:44 PM
I know where it is from 5Cats. It is incredibly annoying.

Sorry @markust, it was just so... alarming! at how obvious these "logical errors" were...

I know we're all guilty of them now and then, but geez! Measuring heat in "Hiroshima Bombs" is the very definition of "fear mongering" eh?

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5968 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 4:17:25 PM
~paws on hips~

Step aside, Ollie, and throw me the keys to your Cadillac. AND MAKE IT SNAPPY. You've figured out the Great Liberal Global Warming Conspiracy, so you must surrender all your most-loved material possessions to liberals and a passel of shiftless black people.

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 4:17:17 PM
I know where it is from 5Cats. It is incredibly annoying. Everything anyone does here is on that list.

OldOllie
Male, 60-69, Midwest US
 11707 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 4:00:10 PM
"Climate change" isn't about saving the world; it's about liberals bossing people around and taking their stuff.

Edgarska19
Male, 18-29, Western US
 1052 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 3:56:34 PM
The daily mail.

I read it just out of curiosity and it's pretty much what i expected.

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 21790 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 3:38:13 PM
@Markust: It's From This List
Which I posted at IAB. I cannot, however, link it and quote at the same time, you know eh?

"the Earth is absorbing approximately 268 terajoules of extra solar energy per second."

@Squrlz4: What's the baseline? 10 quintillion? How do we know it's 100% mankind's fault this "so called increase". How'd we establish what's "normal"? The distant past when it was 2.2C warmer than today? Or when the CO2 levels were 10X what they are now?

Really, you're so very helpful!

Dang, I was being polite too. Teh sarcasm, it just slipped out!

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 3:31:30 PM
5Cats "Take your pick: "Appeal to Fear" or "Guilt by Association" but either way, it only attacks the messenger, not the message. ("Ad Hominem")"

If you are going to keep this crap up I am 100% done with you. It is the most annoying thing I have ever seen on here. What are you in Junior High?

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5968 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 2:38:40 PM
@5Cats: Weak sauce there, 5Cats, weak sauce.

Seriously: In response to my thorough discrediting of this dishonest article and my explanation of how everything you've contributed toward it--the title of the post and two sentences of description--is FALSE, that's all you've got? A complaint about expressing the additional heat energy the Earth is absorbing in terms of Hiroshima bomb explosions?

Well, let me help you out then. Stated less dramatically, the Earth is absorbing approximately 268 terajoules of extra solar energy per second. Hope that helps. Don't mention it. =^.^=

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 21790 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 2:27:52 PM
#3. "The science = unsettled." FALSE

@Squrlz4: That's odd, @markust's link suggested 30% of "climate scientists" thought the current series of "climate changes" were mostly or ALL natural, NOT man made. Hey, argue with him! He's the one who said it.

It's already been mentioned that "oil and coal" stand to make a LOT of money off this. Carbon Credits? They're chomping at the bit!!!

But just ignore all the other stuff I've said and trot your little straw men out for you to vanquish! Windmills to tilt at, paper tigers to slay...

@LordJim: The "prediction" said constant increase in temperature due ENTIRELY to "man-made greenhouse gasses", but reality shows something else. Is the PREDICTION true or false? Sure it's "a little early" to say it's 100% dead, but it's looking sort of pale...

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 21790 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 2:19:46 PM
Goes to show you how warped their stances are.

@patchouli: Wait, what? WHO in the world has ever said both? No one at IAB, not ME that's for certain.
>>See: "Straw Man"
Like @DromEd said: Source! Or GTFO.

@Squrlz4: From your link:

"...it has accumulated the equivalent heat of 4 Hiroshima atomic bomb detonations per second."

I was unaware of the scientific unit of measure "Hiroshima Bombs", are YOU sure it's the kind of "science" YOU want to promote?
Take your pick: "Appeal to Fear" or "Guilt by Association" but either way, it only attacks the messenger, not the message. ("Ad Hominem")



Just make the ranges wider, and PRESTO! It fits!

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5968 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 2:12:33 PM
(Cont'd from previous post)

#3. "The science = unsettled."
FALSE: There are no national or major scientific institutions anywhere in the world that dispute the theory of anthropogenic climate change. Not one. At this point in time, the only people who claim the science of anthropogenic climate change is "unsettled" are those who are (a) motivated primarily by an aversion to anything they perceive as "liberal"; (b) oil and coal industry executives; and (c) crackpots.

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5968 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 2:10:21 PM
I think the article itself has been thoroughly discredited. Allow me now to address the assertions made in the submission's title and description.

#1. "Temp Refusing To Follow AGW Predictions"
FALSE: As shown by the graph the article itself provides, global land temperatures are within the predicted ranges, albeit at the lower end of the ranges.

#2. "It's now outside the predicted range entirely, in just a few years."
FALSE: It's not outside the predicted range *at all*. The added phrase "in just a few years" is odd: Is it outside the predicted range now or "in just a few years"? Note that the model predicts that the temperature track will fall outside the 95% range 1 year in 20, or 5% of the time. So even if the line were outside of the 95% range for the most recent year's data (which it is not), it would not be at variance with the model.

(Cont'd next post)

TheGuySmiley
Male, 18-29, Canada
 1222 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 1:48:12 PM
This is kind of silly, the human race is polluting more than ever before. While i have no doubt corporations want to let things be business as usual, the glaring problem is our pollution is going to affect us sooner or later, and likely already is.

BrimstoneOne
Male, 30-39, Canada
 2239 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 1:39:10 PM
What a Craptastic post

DromEd
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 1391 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 1:37:38 PM
Citation Patchy? Just who here has said that?

patchouly
Male, 40-49, Canada
 4078 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 1:24:56 PM
I find it funny how the folks who are claiming that the temp has done this many times in our Earths 4.5 billion years are usually the same people that also defend the Bible's assertion that the Earth is only 6000 years old. Goes to show you how warped their stances are.

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5968 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 1:01:21 PM
This dishonest article has already been thoroughly debunked (link below).

Here's the gist for the busy among us: "David Rose has given us yet another textbook example of global warming denial, quite literally denying that the planet is warming. In attempting to support this myth, Rose has grossly misrepresented the positions of most of the climate scientists he references in his article, as well as misinterpreting their data."

5Cats, I have to ask: Is this really the kind of journalism you want to promote?

"David Rose Hides the Rise in Global Warming"

Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 5968 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 11:25:36 AM
The *Daily Mail* and its coverage of global warming, courtesy of the "Global Warming Policy Foundation," is a long-standing clown act.

If you want to see just how absurd this dynamic duo is, take a look at this.

LordJim
Male, 50-59, Europe
 3697 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 11:22:52 AM
'the data is true OR false based on WHO prints it?'

Data is data, but data in the hands of a clown with an agenda which is then twisted clumsily to support an ignorant position is, well, a Daily Mail science article.

LordJim
Male, 50-59, Europe
 3697 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 11:19:47 AM
5cats
'proven beyond ANY doubt that the AGW people deliberately manipulated their "models" to match the data'

Evidence or link please. And not to the Daily Mail. I seriously hope you are not talking about the 'Climategate' fiasco.


markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 11:08:16 AM
"Trololololol... 5Cats all day.. you people don't learn."

It's hard not to bite when faced with so much stupid. Each time I tell myself, just move on, but somehow he pulls me in. I look at the 2 star rating and I know it is a troll post and he still pulls me in. The troll is strong in this one.

5Cats
Male, 50-59, Canada
 21790 Posts
Friday, March 22, 2013 10:57:29 AM
@davymid: Again, the data is true OR false based on WHO prints it? Same data.

"The line showing world temperatures comes from the MET Office 'HadCRUT4' database, which contains readings from more than 30,000 measuring posts"

You disputing that? idk, I didn't "lookitup" myself...

I suppose the "National Enquirer" was wrong when they claimed John Edwards (Democrat, twice candidate for Vice President) had a "love child" with his mistress while his wife had cancer?

Oh wait! That was 100% true! But it CANNOT be true, it wasn't printed in the "proper papers"...

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.