Inhofe calls the goracles hand

[B. Max]

Open your eyes and you will see it.

It's been proven for a long time now

If it's been proven for a long time now it shouldn't be hard for you to prove it.

[Guthrie]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/s...fknowledge.html

like I said, just open your eyes --- No one can help you if you remain in that state of cognitive dissonance.

[B. Max]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/s...fknowledge.html

like I said, just open your eyes --- No one can help you if you remain in that state of cognitive dissonance.

That is propaganda, composed of junk science, misleading information and outright lies.

[Guthrie]

Graphic

[B. Max]

Graphic

Looks like you're out of ammo.

[Guthrie]

you have yet to even take an honest look

but it's nice to see you label Bush administration as outright liars and propagandists

...

As with any field of scientific study, there are uncertainties associated with the science of climate change. This does not imply that scientists do not have confidence in many aspects of climate science. Some aspects of the science are known with virtual certainty1, because they are based on well-known physical laws and documented trends. Current understanding of many other aspects of climate change ranges from “likely” to “uncertain.

What's Known

Scientists know with virtual certainty that:

* Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.

* The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

* A warming trend of about 0.7 to 1.5°F occurred during the 20th century. Warming occurred in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and over the oceans (NRC, 2001).

* The major greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries. It is therefore virtually certain that atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will continue to rise over the next few decades.

* Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet.

...

Environmental Protection Agency

[B. Max]

you have yet to even take an honest look

Not true. I've been doing this for years and have looked at just about everything there is, and there is no evidence yet that CO2 causes any meaningful temperature rise. Only evidence that suggests it doesn't.

http://www.nov55.com/crunch.html

[Guthrie]

you have yet to even take an honest look

Not true. I've been doing this for years and have looked at just about everything there is, and there is no evidence yet that CO2 causes any meaningful temperature rise. Only evidence that suggests it doesn't.

http://www.nov55.com/crunch.html

you want to call the EPA propagandists and liars and at the same time, you offer as evidence evidence that pile of crap????

[Guthrie]

some of the other brilliant concepts of your source:

http://www.nov55.com/index.html

The guy has an MS in biology but he wants to correct Physicists on the nature of energy - he wants to correct the CDC on the dangers of Anthrax - he wants to correct EINSTEIN on the nature of the universe

:lol:

Energy Misdefined

Physicists designed a definition of energy which erased some difficult questions which they could not answer. more

The Biology of Anthrax

The biology of anthrax shows that it is not a terrorist weapon. more

The Truth about Relativity

Relativity is based on contradictions, such as the receiving point of light determining its velocity, so effect precedes cause. more

Big Bang Theory

It gets more absurd all the time. Galaxies supposedly moved to their present vicinity in a fraction of a second before the laws of physics began. more

This is also from your source, how sad:

http://www.nov55.com/index.html

I need money,

but it has to be enough to do some good.

I live on Social Security Disability of $450 per Month,

and any additional income is deducted dollar for dollar.

If you give $150,000, your tax will be about 30%, and mine none.

[Guthrie]

I am assuming, naturally, that you are NOT the disabled biologist who runs that site.

If you are him, I am sorry for the insults but, no, I won't be cutting you a check for $150K. Not even to change your mind.

[B. Max]

you want to call the EPA propagandists and liars and at the same time, you offer as evidence evidence that pile of crap????

Actually the EPA are a bunch of liars and most of them got there under Clinton who was the liar king.

[Guthrie]

and you are, it seems, unable to defend that handicapped biology moron

and yet, he is the FIRST source you cite ---

that says it all

[B. Max]

some of the other brilliant concepts of your source:

You have failed to prove anything wrong that he says, and much of what he says is the work of others which he credits for it.

This is certainly true and he has not been the only one saying it, and it is because of the Hansen's of the world that it is true, and outfits like the corrupt IPCC.

1. Science is in a state of decay due to corruption. Science sets the standards of rationality for society. What happens to science will happen to all of society.

[B. Max]

and you are, it seems, unable to defend that handicapped biology moron

and yet, he is the FIRST source you cite ---

that says it all

I don't have to defend him. He can defend himself. What have you proven wrong.

[Guthrie]

some of the other brilliant concepts of your source:

You have failed to prove anything wrong that he says, and much of what he says is the work of others which he credits for it.

This is certainly true and he has not been the only one saying it, and it is because of the Hansen's of the world that it is true, and outfits like the corrupt IPCC.

1. Science is in a state of decay due to corruption. Science sets the standards of rationality for society. What happens to science will happen to all of society.

he doesn't need to be refuted, his outlandish and megalomaniacal attacks on the giants of physics single him out as a misdirected nutcase --- all he needs is a soapbox and a bottle of thunderbird in a brown paper bag

[B. Max]

he doesn't need to be refuted, his outlandish and megalomaniacal attacks on the giants of physics single him out as a misdirected nutcase --- all he needs is a soapbox and a bottle of thunderbird in a brown paper bag

He hasn't attacked anyone. He has put forword the numbers. That's what science is about, unfortunately you don't understand that. You and the Hansen crowd seem to think it's about smear and politics.

[Guthrie]

he doesn't need to be refuted, his outlandish and megalomaniacal attacks on the giants of physics single him out as a misdirected nutcase --- all he needs is a soapbox and a bottle of thunderbird in a brown paper bag

He hasn't attacked anyone. He has put forword the numbers. That's what science is about, unfortunately you don't understand that. You and the Hansen crowd seem to think it's about smear and politics.

he attacked Einstein and every physicist who accepts the Big Bang Theory -- and the source of his numbers (and you know, he doesn't really use numbers, not the way you seem to claim) seems to be relationships he has made up in his own head -

moreover, he claims to be a disabled scientist and I am wondering what it takes for a scientist to be disabled -- I mean, Stephen Hawking (another genuine scientist he attacks) never sought disability checks -

What terrible and pathetic disability inflicts your biologist?

[B. Max]

- and the source of his numbers seems to be relationships he has made up in his own head -

Oh really.

http://www.john-daly.com/artifact.htm

[Guthrie]

Yes, really.

He's a flake.

ergo, so is anyone who believes him

[B. Max]

Yes, really.

He's a flake.

ergo, so is anyone who believes him

I just proved you were wrong. You are the fake.

[Guthrie]

no, you never proved I was wrong

[B. Max]

no, you never proved I was wrong

Yeah right.

http://www.john-daly.com/artifact.htm

[Guthrie]

Yes, I am right

John Daly died 3 years ago - and I don't care to figure out how old or flawed the numbers your biologist got from him are but I do know the guy was involved in land frauds somewhere in Australia or New Zealand maybe.

so you and John Daly and Gary Novak can take your land swindles and your insults to Einstein and your mushroom studies and pile them up in the middle of the room and they won't amount to a dustpile in the EPA's broom closet, let alone the scientific fact that the EPA was forced to admit to despite their dedication to the Buschistas disdain for science ---

if the EPA has lied at all it they have done so on the side of Global Warming denials and the oil company clowns who peddle them

get over it - you've lost

[B. Max]

Yes, I am right

John Daly died 3 years ago - and I don't care to figure out how old or flawed the numbers your biologist got from him are but I do know the guy was involved in land frauds somewhere in Australia or New Zealand maybe.

So you admit you were wrong, that's good. Now you are still wrong. Daly got them from reputable scientists and numbers don't change, 2+2 always makes four just as an example. I see you still can't resist using smear as a substitute for science.

[Guthrie]

Yes, I am right

John Daly died 3 years ago - and I don't care to figure out how old or flawed the numbers your biologist got from him are but I do know the guy was involved in land frauds somewhere in Australia or New Zealand maybe.

So you admit you were wrong, that's good. Now you are still wrong. Daly got them from reputable scientists and numbers don't change, 2+2 always makes four just as an example. I see you still can't resist using smear as a substitute for science.

wow, you are so deep into your cognitive dissonance that when I say "I am right," you think I am saying, "I was wrong." That is not just sad, it is pathological.