Democrats SUCK!!

[me]

Hey, "me."

The theory of gravity is just a theory, too.

Care to climb up on a 10-story building to test it?

The reason scientists do not ascribe absolutes to much of anything is because of the possibility (however infinitesimally small) that it might not prove true in the trillionth time someone tests it.

However, that itsy-bitsy, teensy-weensy possibility is enough for the ignorant to pump enough hot air into it for it to grow into a hot air balloon, usually by someone selling some self-serving philosophy about "moral goodness" or a "right to do business."

Hypocritical bastards.

I do believe gravity can be a proven fact so that argument doesn't even make sense. 
One group of scientists plugged one set of figures into a computer based on their observances and studies and one set plugged in another set of figures based on their observances and studies and came up with different answers so who's to say which one is correct?  There are studies on both sides of every issue and it all boils down to which one a person sees as being more credible.  That's where differences of opinion come in.  Neither will be fact unless and until it happens or doesn't happen.

Same with figures.  Depending on what variables are plugged in with "projected" figures you're going to get different answers as to how much will or won't be generated by a particular action.  Again leaving it open for differences of opinion because it won't be fact on either side until it either works or doesn't work.  Then it's "ha ha I told you so" time for one side or the other.

[Bo D]

OMG! Are you that dense? You quoted a "source" which claimed that a study by the MET office showed that "the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997"

Yet when I showed you that the Met office refuted your very article, you refuse to believe it.

Read this very carefully .....

"
Look what the  Met Office has to say about that ....

http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/

Today the Mail on Sunday published a story written by David Rose entitled "Forget global warming – it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about". (This is the article you posted.)

This article includes numerous errors in the reporting of published peer reviewed science undertaken by the Met Office Hadley Centre and for Mr. Rose to suggest that the latest global temperatures available show no warming in the last 15 years is entirely misleading.

Despite the Met Office having spoken to David Rose ahead of the publication of the story, he has chosen to not fully include the answers we gave him to questions around decadal projections produced by the Met Office or his belief that we have seen no warming since 1997.

what is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a trend of warming, with the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the warmest in the instrumental record going back to 1850. Depending on which temperature records you use, 2010 was the warmest year on record  for NOAA NCDC and NASA GISS, and the second warmest on record in HadCRUT3."

[me]

FAIL!

Final numbers are in for the so-called "cash for clunkers" program, and by most measures, the program looks like a roaring success:

690,114 cars were purchased under the program; two-thirds of those bought by consumers were passenger cars.

The average rebate was $4,170.18, for a total of $2.878 billion. The rest of the $3 billion budget will cover administrative expenses.

The average new car bought with the rebates got 9.2 mpg more than the average clunker traded in, for an annual average fuel savings per driver of 277 gallons of fuel or about $720.

The Department of Transportation credits the program with saving 42,000 jobs in the auto industry and says it expects those jobs will be sustainable, because automakers have ramped up production to meet the clunkers demand.

Notably, 690,114 older cars were taken off the road, including 450,778 SUVs and other light trucks that likely lacked electronic stability control and other modern safety equipment. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has estimated that making ESC standard on new cars would save as many as 10,000 lives a year. This program has taken a significant step toward that goal.

And here is another view on the program: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204884404574366664026140786.html

http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/11/07/cash-for-clunkers-failure-minorities-poor-people-hardest-hit/

http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-10-39-REV.pdf

[Henry Hawk]

not gonna git in no pissin match...

[me]

Now STFU

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html

[Exterminator]

Now STFU

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html

Perhaps you missed this:

Note to general public:

My position on the current global warming is the same as the overwhelming majority of international climate scientists: the current rate of global warming is unprecedented and is being caused by humans. In no way can my summary of the research regarding the impact of regional climate change on the Viking civilization and Europe during the Little Ice Age be used to "prove" the current global warming is due to a natural cycle.
Please view Global Warming: Man or Myth which addresses many of the questions asked about the human impact on the current climate change in a very simple format. The climate change being observed today is unprecedented in modern times and can only be explained by the rapid increase of greenhouse gases by human activities. There are no known natural forces that could have caused the modern climate change.

[me]

Perhaps you missed this:

Note to general public:

My position on the current global warming is the same as the overwhelming majority of international climate scientists: the current rate of global warming is unprecedented and is being caused by humans. In no way can my summary of the research regarding the impact of regional climate change on the Viking civilization and Europe during the Little Ice Age be used to "prove" the current global warming is due to a natural cycle.
Please view Global Warming: Man or Myth which addresses many of the questions asked about the human impact on the current climate change in a very simple format. The climate change being observed today is unprecedented in modern times and can only be explained by the rapid increase of greenhouse gases by human activities. There are no known natural forces that could have caused the modern climate change.

I was referring to the grape thing and it being too cold to grow them for a period of time.  It did happen.  The rest of it has been discussed and different opinions have been posted about it. 

[Exterminator]

I was referring to the grape thing and it being too cold to grow them for a period of time.  It did happen.  The rest of it has been discussed and different opinions have been posted about it.

You originally attempted to use the grape thing as proof against global warming...epic FAIL!

[me]

You originally attempted to use the grape thing as proof against global warming...epic FAIL!

Was the first ice age caused by man? 

[Bo D]

not gonna git in no pissin match...

You got a prostate problem?

[Exterminator]

Was the first ice age caused by man?

Seriously?  That's your reasoning?  That because an asteroid probably hit our planet at some point people couldn't possibly be contributing to global warming?  I guess that because a tree fell down in a wind storm once people couldn't possibly be contributing to deforestation either; huh?   

[Henry Hawk]

You got a prostate problem?

Nope, I gotta healthy one....how about yours?

[The Troll]

Nope, I gotta healthy one....how about yours?

  Your lucky, but then you're not 60 yet.   

[me]

Seriously?  That's your reasoning?  That because an asteroid probably hit our planet at some point people couldn't possibly be contributing to global warming?  I guess that because a tree fell down in a wind storm once people couldn't possibly be contributing to deforestation either; huh?   

The costly measures that are being proposed won't make a dimes worth of difference.  In the 70's it was global cooling, now it's global warming, in 10yrs it will be global cooling again.   

[Exterminator]

The costly measures that are being proposed won't make a dimes worth of difference.

Complete hyperbole.

In the 70's it was global cooling, now it's global warming...

As has been explained to you several hundred times on this forum, global cooling was never a position overwhelmingly accepted by the majority of the world's climatologists.