"Global Warming is rubbish"

[akphidelt]

147 climate scientists responded to a Web based survey six years ago.

You don't understand what that means. Mainly because you're comically dumb and easily misled.

Lol, apparently normal people can understand a survey but you can't because it was "web based". How fucking stupid are you... would it change if they mailed it in? Hahahaha

An invitation to participate in the survey
was sent to 10,257 Earth scientists.
The database was built from Keane and
Martinez [2007], which lists all geosciences
faculty at reporting academic institutions,
along with researchers at state
geologic surveys associated with local
universities, and researchers at U.S. federal
research facilities (e.g., U.S. Geological
Survey, NASA, and NOAA (U.S.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration) facilities; U.S. Department
of Energy national laboratories; and
so forth). To maximize the response rate,
the survey was designed to take less than
2 minutes to complete, and it was administered
by a professional online survey
site (http://www.questionpro.com) that allowed one-time
participation by those who received the invitation.

 

[Acebb]

There's tons of data. That's why smart, educated, scientists believe man made global warming exists.

It has already been pointed out to you multiple times that "consensus" had no meaning in science.

You have no idea what science is or does.

Which is why you comically asserted that the scientific method doesn't apply to global warming because they can't put the atmosphere in a lab.

You actually believe that is responsive.

You're a laughable idiot.

 

[akphidelt]

Except I've never linked to a .com blogger

lol

Keep flailing, idiot.

Lmao, the image you just posted came from "thefederalist.com".

Very scientific information coming from them, lol.

 

[Acebb]

Lol, apparently normal people can understand a survey but you can't because it was "web based". How fucking stupid are you... would it change if they mailed it in? Hahahaha

.

The fact that you have no idea how surveys are conducted is quite funny.

Your responses are a joke. You're a scientific illiterate.

 

[SheriffJoe]

the prepubescent troll still thinks "web surveys" = "scientific consensus!" lmfao

Kinda like he believes debt is created not borrowed! Created folks!

The phony, prepubescent troll is a know-it-all who doesn't know anything.

"Akphidelt is an idiot, but worse than that...he's an idiot that doesn't know it."

http://thepoliticsforums.com/threads/2793-Dear-gawd-PF?p=45432&viewfull=1#post45432

Voted dumbest troll in this forum for very good reason!

Loser!@#0

 

[Acebb]

Lmao, the image you just posted came from "thefederalist.com".

Very scientific information coming from them, lol.

So in other words, you can't respond to the fact that the climate models aren't correct.

We knew that already.

 

[akphidelt]

It has already been pointed out to you multiple times that "consensus" had no meaning in science.

You have no idea what science is or does.

Which is why you comically asserted that the scientific method doesn't apply to global warming because they can't put the atmosphere in a lab.

You actually believe that is responsive.

You're a laughable idiot.

What are you talking about? Lol. So you understand what science is and does? You are a weird dude. Consensus is a normal word used when quoting surveys and opinions, lol. Probably the dumbest person on the site.

 

[akphidelt]

The fact that you have no idea how surveys are conducted is quite funny.

Your responses are a joke. You're a scientific illiterate.

The fact you think surveys are conducted in some mysterious way that no one knows is quite funny, lol.

 

[akphidelt]

So in other words, you can't respond to the fact that the climate models aren't correct.

We knew that already.

I'm not a climatologist. I let scientists do the talking for me. Not "thefederalist.com" bloggers. Lol

 

[Acebb]

I was generous is saying 147 (mainly because the dishonest authors said "approximately 5%) climate scientists responded to that Web based survey in 2008.

Another way of looking at this is: The invitation was sent to 10,257 Earth scientists and they received 3,146 completed surveys. From these completed surveys Doran and Zimmerman separated 79 scientists that listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also published more than 50% of their peer reviewed papers on the subject of climate change. The answers of those 79 scientists on the two questions influenced the result: ≈97% agreed with those statements and therefor were part of the consensus.

ointer:

 

[Acebb]

I'm not a climatologist. I let scientists do the talking for me. Not "thefederalist.com" bloggers. Lol

So in other words, you merely repeat talking points you have no idea are true.

Of course, we knew that already as well.

 

[Acebb]

The fact you think surveys are conducted in some mysterious way that no one knows is quite funny, lol.

Except I don't think they are conducted in some "mysterious way" at all.

Keep flailing, idiot.

 

[akphidelt]

So in other words, you merely repeat talking points you have no idea are true.

Of course, we knew that already as well.

Yes, I'm not a climatologist and I can't tell a climatologist if their research is true or not because I don't research global warming.

The funniest thing is neither can you but you act like you can, hahaha. By posting graphs from "thefederalist.com". Can't write better fucking comedy than this, hahaha!!

 

[akphidelt]

Except I don't think they are conducted in some "mysterious way" at all.

Keep flailing, idiot.

So then what is it about surveys that I "don't know"?

 

[Acebb]

"Data"

We are not in a position to supply data for a particular country not covered by the example agreements referred to earlier, as we have never had sufficient resources to keep track of the exact source of each individual monthly value. Since the 1980s, we have merged the data we have received into existing series or begun new ones, so it is impossible to say if all stations within a particular country or if all of an individual record should be freely available.

Gee, feed "data" into a climate model, and you get the result you want. Go figure

 

[scottcarter]

Lmao, that's your argument? That there is not 100% agreement therefore it doesn't exist. Solid logic! And no, I have never once acted like a climatologist.

Lmao, that's your argument? fact noun \ˈfakt\ : something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence : a true piece of information yes you do act like a climatologist. A gulible one mind you.

 

[SheriffJoe]

Debate Statistics
Debates:	3
Lost:	3
Tied:
Won:
Win Ratio:	0.00%
Percentile:	66.97%
Elo Ranking:	1,761
Statistics based on completed debates.

http://www.therxforum.com/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=987922

O-FER Akphagdelt listens to "very, VERY smart people!"

:laughingb

 

[akphidelt]

Lmao, that's your argument? fact noun \ˈfakt\ : something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence : a true piece of information yes you do act like a climatologist. A gulible one mind you.

Lmao, so your argument is still that you have no clue what climatology is but global warming doesn't exist because you think it doesn't exist. Got ya. Your thoughts must be very powerful.

 

[scottcarter]

Ak Gore must be proud AK

 

[Acebb]

Yes, I'm not a climatologist and I can't tell a climatologist if their research is true or not because I don't research global warming.

Right, you just repeat talking points. You have no idea if they are true or interest if they are true.

Life is easier that way because you're little thinker with a tiny mind.