New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

UN Kooks: Address Gender and Income Inequality or 1,000,000 Species Will Go Extinct!

  • Thread starter Deleted member 21794
  • Start date

EatTheRich

President
The words 'current', 'models' and 'theory'. Basically prove this Chicken Little Scam.

They already know they have my old, easily scared base all worried.

Every so often they can say 'Hey look ice is melting !!!!:eek::eek:"

Or "Hey look it's warmer than it was last year by 1 degree !!!!"

There is no "Law of Manmade Climate Change" is there ?

By the way, look at the record warmest temps in many of the states. For days on end. many were 100 years ago. Dust bowl anyone ?
And if you ONLY considered U.S. temperatures and ignored temperatures on the other 98.1% of the Earth’s surface, you wouldn’t have nearly as much evidence for global warming as we actually have, since the movement of the jet stream due to global warming has helped mask the effects with respect to much of the U.S.
 
D

Deleted member 21794

Guest
Again. My point is very simple. In a graph that covers millions of years, a trend lasting less than a century does not cover enough space on the time axis to really be visible.
So then the previous warming trends could have equally or higher rises in temperatures that can't be seen on that timeline. You've moved the bar, led again, and as usual, lost the argument in the process.

It must suck being a parrot and a liar.
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
Again. My point is very simple. In a graph that covers millions of years, a trend lasting less than a century does not cover enough space on the time axis to really be visible.
There is no data to create this million year graph, and as such the graph is an opinion not a fact, the opinion of a cult member to be exact.

So Mr. Heisenberg, have you made the changes to physics that you promised and in doing so solved the cosmological constant and proved AGW
 

EatTheRich

President
So then the previous warming trends could have equally or higher rises in temperatures that can't be seen on that timeline. You've moved the bar, led again, and as usual, lost the argument in the process.

It must suck being a parrot and a liar.
Scientists have considered that hypothesis and found it very unlikely given the balance of energy absorbed and energy emitted 1) under atmospheric conditions known to have obtained for the last 20,000 years, where the lower energy level makes it extremely unlikely that a change so abrupt could happen in such a short time due to natural fluctuations and known causes; 2) under present atmospheric conditions, where the tremendous added heat energy from additional greenhouse gas molecules being stimulated provides an obvious explanation for the steep rise in temperature
 

EatTheRich

President
There is no data to create this million year graph, and as such the graph is an opinion not a fact, the opinion of a cult member to be exact.

So Mr. Heisenberg, have you made the changes to physics that you promised and in doing so solved the cosmological constant and proved AGW
1. I’m not the one who posted the graph to support my anti-science claims
2. I’m not the one saying mainstream physics is wrong.
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
1. I’m not the one who posted the graph to support my anti-science claims
2. I’m not the one saying mainstream physics is wrong.
You have posted graphs, if you forgot this I suggest a lobotomy. You also said that AGW is fundamental to physics and that physics fails without it.

Clue, physics has existed since Newton and Galileo without AGW. You are so mentally incompetent that you just said that if there was no AGW or on another planet or in space that physics does not work.

You are proof that there should be a test to vote
 

EatTheRich

President
You have posted graphs, if you forgot this I suggest a lobotomy. You also said that AGW is fundamental to physics and that physics fails without it.

Clue, physics has existed since Newton and Galileo without AGW. You are so mentally incompetent that you just said that if there was no AGW or on another planet or in space that physics does not work.

You are proof that there should be a test to vote
You are the one who posted the million-year graph you now are calling “fake” (as you call all science fake).

Newton’s physics is from the 17th century. AGW theory is based on discoveries not made until the 19th century.
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
You are the one who posted the million-year graph you now are calling “fake” (as you call all science fake).

Newton’s physics is from the 17th century. AGW theory is based on discoveries not made until the 19th century.
Show me the million year fake graph that I posted with a link to the post

Physics did not begin in the 19th century. In fact math has no beginning as it is part of reality. That is to say that math and physics existed before being discovered by as said Newton and Galileo

Take your time, we need precision Mr. Heisenberg
 
Last edited:

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
You are the one who posted the million-year graph you now are calling “fake” (as you call all science fake).

Newton’s physics is from the 17th century. AGW theory is based on discoveries not made until the 19th century.
You quit so soon.......

Frankly Mr. Heisenberg I had higher Hope's for you.....

No shame though, very few actually pass my class.

Feel free to try again, but unless you get the lobotomy, I would try Tai Chi
 
Last edited:

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
You are the one who posted the million-year graph you now are calling “fake” (as you call all science fake).

Newton’s physics is from the 17th century. AGW theory is based on discoveries not made until the 19th century.
Frankly Werner I am disappointed in you
 

EatTheRich

President
Show me the million year fake graph that I posted with a link to the post

Physics did not begin in the 19th century. In fact math has no beginning as it is part of reality. That is to say that math and physics existed before being discovered by as said Newton and Galileo

Take your time, we need precision Mr. Heisenberg
Here is the graph your side posted in this thread. It is not fake, just your interpretation of it that is flawed.
nasa.gov global temperature chart million years

Our understanding of physics has advanced over time. Newton didn’t understand gas laws that were discovered only after his death. It is not obvious that his understanding of physics would need to be revised to be consistent with AGW not occurring (although it would need to). It is obvious that Einstein’s understanding of physics (Nobel Prize for describing Brownian motion) would need to be radically rejected from bottom to top unless we accept the AGW that is implied by it.
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
Here is the graph your side posted in this thread. It is not fake, just your interpretation of it that is flawed.
nasa.gov global temperature chart million years

Our understanding of physics has advanced over time. Newton didn’t understand gas laws that were discovered only after his death. It is not obvious that his understanding of physics would need to be revised to be consistent with AGW not occurring (although it would need to). It is obvious that Einstein’s understanding of physics (Nobel Prize for describing Brownian motion) would need to be radically rejected from bottom to top unless we accept the AGW that is implied by it.
The link does not work Mr. Heisenberg, please try again. But keep this in mind, the internet is more twilight zone than it is real. No graph, no wiki page, not even your own words are to be believed, you are now in a cyber twilight zone.

Math can not be revised, it is what it is, only human understanding gets revised. Thus the physics which Newton worked is exactly the same today as at any point in time and space. Or do you really believe that gravity, time and space are different today than when Newty watched the apple fall......

You might
 
Last edited:

EatTheRich

President
The link does not work Mr. Heisenberg, please try again. But keep this in mind, the internet is more twilight zone than it is real. No graph, no wiki page, not even your own words are to be believed, you are now in a cyber twilight zone.
Here is the link to where the chart was introduced by your side.
https://www.politicaljack.com/threads/un-kooks-address-gender-and-income-inequality-or-1-000-000-species-will-go-extinct.121185/page-15#post-2426991

I got the nickname “Mr. Heisenberg” because I kept wanting to keep the discussion of a science question focused on the science evidence, while you were careful to discuss everything but that.
Now you are warning us in advance that you will reject any evidence posted to you because after all it is on the Internet that we are having this discussion.
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
Here is the link to where the chart was introduced by your side.
https://www.politicaljack.com/threads/un-kooks-address-gender-and-income-inequality-or-1-000-000-species-will-go-extinct.121185/page-15#post-2426991

I got the nickname “Mr. Heisenberg” because I kept wanting to keep the discussion of a science question focused on the science evidence, while you were careful to discuss everything but that.
Now you are warning us in advance that you will reject any evidence posted to you because after all it is on the Internet that we are having this discussion.
I did not post that link, the thinker did, and you have just humiliated yourself once again

Ya know Mr. Heisenberg, you really should take up chess......you might have a chance at that

Would you like to play a game of chess?
 
Last edited:

EatTheRich

President
I did not post that link, the thinker did, and you have just humiliated yourself once again

Ya know Mr. Heisenberg, you really should take up chess......you might have a chance at that
You’re right, you didn’t post the link to the graph that you arbitrarily and without evidence discredited. Your ally in your war on science did.
 

Winston

Do you feel lucky, Punk
You’re right, you didn’t post the link to the graph that you arbitrarily and without evidence discredited. Your ally in your war on science did.
It's ok, we understand that you are confused.

Again, would you like to play a game of chess?
 
D

Deleted member 21794

Guest
Scientists have considered that hypothesis and found it very unlikely given the balance of energy absorbed and energy emitted 1) under atmospheric conditions known to have obtained for the last 20,000 years, where the lower energy level makes it extremely unlikely that a change so abrupt could happen in such a short time due to natural fluctuations and known causes; 2) under present atmospheric conditions, where the tremendous added heat energy from additional greenhouse gas molecules being stimulated provides an obvious explanation for the steep rise in temperature
Gee, that's funny. We were discussing the last million years. Go change your diaper. You're full of crap.
 
Top