Jump to content

I'll just leave this here


TxHoops

Recommended Posts

On August 26, 2017 at 8:11 PM, TxHoops said:

That's exactly what I'm saying.  That "rag" is merely recycling more fake news to keep the kool aid drinkers from getting thirsty. 

This is the hidden content, please

This is the hidden content, please

This is the hidden content, please

On the upside, I suppose only being 6 months late could be considered progress from this group :D 

Look Hoops, I'll admit I'm old and set in my ways, but not so much that new evidence can't change my mind.  That said, I've had a recent epiphany that there may be some truth to what your saying.  My electricity went off at 8:30 last night and is still off.  So until I get electricity back, as The Monkees said, I'm a believer.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
1 hour ago, REBgp said:

From the London Times.  Almost sure it's not a conservative rag.  Guess what?  Them MMGW folks done messed up again.  Just when I was going to start protesting global warming.  Oh well..........

This is the hidden content, please

This exact article could have been written in the late 1990s...and many were, but were ignored...just like this one will be. All of the models have been wrong, and wrong on the warm side. Any sane person would have to question why the models are always wrong, and are always wrong on one side. Could it be due to the fact that if a crisis exists or is imminent, the money for research/remediation flows like wine, and if a catastrophic issue is not a hand, the money becomes scarce? I don't have the time to give this issue the proper response just yet, but I will definitely revisit this issue at a later date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Englebert said:

This exact article could have been written in the late 1990s...and many were, but were ignored...just like this one will be. All of the models have been wrong, and wrong on the warm side. Any sane person would have to question why the models are always wrong, and are always wrong on one side. Could it be due to the fact that if a crisis exists or is imminent, the money for research/remediation flows like wine, and if a catastrophic issue is not a hand, the money becomes scarce? I don't have the time to give this issue the proper response just yet, but I will definitely revisit this issue at a later date.

Yes, it is breaking the odds always being wrong on the hot side.  And yet the majority of the scientist got bought into it.....oops, I meant buy into it.   Freudian slip?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,905
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    rikimuky
    Newest Member
    rikimuky
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...