Fake News - Global Warming Consensus

[Darc Knight]

To quote post 393,"Do you actually know what science is?"

That was clearly a question to which either a yes, or a no, response could amply suffice, and as such did not appear to be seeking my definition of the word science.

In pointing this out, I wish to emphasize that I am not seeking to insult you, and I respectfully ask that you accord me the same courtesy.

Perhaps provide some substance.
You do not show others courtesy by your continued trolling. You will be shown the same respect you afford others.

 

[cynic]

Your posts in this thread show a gross ignorance of science.

Rather than continuing with the gratuitous insults, wouldn't it be preferable that you take the time to explain what you actually mean when you use the word "science"?

Irrespective of the thread title, nothing prevents anyone from presenting a position which is actually based on science.

I believe we are in agreement on this.

However, that concept eludes you.

Excuse me? What exactly are you saying here? To which concept do you refer and what is your basis for holding such an opinion?

However, while consensus is not science per se, to propose the consensus is fictitious ("fake") would require evidence showing that the scientific claims made by the multitude of climate scientists who publish on climate matters, are deficient. Exactly where is that evidence?

Please correct me if I have misunderstood you here, but,in an earlier post, did you not claim to have read this thread in its entirety (or words to that effect)?

I realise some here suggest just one thread for "climate change". But the specific focus of this one requires that those who support the title can show that the scientists have simply gotten it wrong.

It just so happens that there are already several climate threads. Experience has shown that issues pertaining to one can often have relevance to many (sometimes all) others, precipitating the repetition of content across multiple threads.

So here we are at page 20 and there is nothing of merit from the deniers of climate science.

Aha!

Spoken like a true "climate scientist".

That's the great thing about religion! One doesn't need to heed one's critics! All one needs do, is promptly dismiss them via accusations of heresy, and thereafter pay such heretics no mind!

 

[Darc Knight]

Cynic logic: "don't insult me but I'm allowed to insult you", "I can ask you a question but you aren't allowed to ask me a similar one".

 

[cynic]

...
You will be shown the same respect you afford others.

So from your stated sentiments, I presume, you will have no cause for complaint when someone responds to yourself with a level of comtempt commensurate with that which you have so amply demonstrated.

Since you hold such a low opinion of myself, my demeanour, and my contributions, I strongly recommend that you avail yourself of this forum's "ignore" facility.

 

[Darc Knight]

So from your stated sentiments, I presume, you will have no cause for complaint when someone responds to yourself with a level of comtempt commensurate with that which you have so amply demonstrated.

Since you hold such a low opinion of myself, my demeanour, and my contributions, I strongly recommend that you avail yourself of this forum's "ignore" facility.

You started trolling me way back when you started the continued "Lucifer" and "repent" comments. Geez, I've provided more Science than you, the self appointed expert, trolling others.

 

[rederob]

<your comments are below, with my responses in red>

Rather than continuing with the gratuitous insults, I think you are conflating how I have explained that you present nothing of merit here and appear to be scientifically inept. wouldn't it be preferable that you take the time to explain what you actually mean when you use the word "science"?
I said from the outset that I will respond to science. Get a dictionary and look it up if you are having problems with the meaning of science.

I believe we are in agreement on this. We may be, but you offer nothing.

Excuse me? What exactly are you saying here? To which concept do you refer The concept mentioned immediately before the sentence, "presenting a position which is actually based on science." and what is your basis for holding such an opinion? The continuous inability on your part to do as I stated.

Please correct me if I have misunderstood you here, but,in an earlier post, did you not claim to have read this thread in its entirety (or words to that effect)? True, I skipped bits that seemed trivial or irrelevant.
It just so happens that there are already several climate threads. So what? Experience has shown that issues pertaining to one can often have relevance to many (sometimes all) others, precipating the repetition of content across multiple threads. I will respond to any science you offer in a post where you make a claim pertinent to that science. Just as I did at post #394 where you presented an astonishingly unscientific idea.
Aha!

Spoken like a true "climate scientist". Actually, any competent person reading the thread would discover your many posts are mostly devoid of climate science., except to the extent that you are confused by it.

That's the great thing about religion! One doesn't need to heed one's critics! All one needs do, is promptly dismiss them via accusations of heresy, and thereafter pay such heretics no mind! Yet you are so blind to your ignorance that you are unaware you have offered nothing relevant to climate science which may be dismissed.

 

[cynic]

You started trolling me way back when you started the continued "Lucifer" and "repent" comments. Geez, I've provided more Science than you, the self appointed expert, trolling others.

I presume you are referring to the following (and/or other posts of that ilk):

Why aren't you prepared to spend a bit more just incase human induced global warming is real?

Why aren’t you prepared to confess and receive absolution for all your sins, just in case Lucifer is real?

If that's how you define trolling, then I no longer consider your accusations offensive, but I would like to reiterate my previous suggestion, namely that you avail yourself of this forum's ignore feature.

 

[rederob]

Somehow my computer posted a draft after the original, and I only write directly into a thread, so I have deleted this post.

 

[Darc Knight]

I presume you are referring to the following (and/or other posts of that ilk):




If that's how you define trolling, then I no longer consider your accusations offensive, but I would like to reiterate my previous suggestion, namely that you avail yourself of this forum's ignore feature.

Your trolling of this thread, of both myself and others has been continuous - far greater than you deceitfully try to claim now. You are unfortunately a person who appears to enjoy taunting others, from behind a keyboard.

 

[Ann]

Careful @rederob , debating Cynic in this thread is more akin to debating a Scientologist.

Hope it's better than your previous arguments. I am always prepared to listen to reasonable arguments. Problem is "the deniers" don't seem to be able to mount a reasonable one - probably why countless Governments are onboard as believers too.

I was privately warned you like to troll. You don't disappoint

Cynic's trolling is generally viewed as an annoyance. A coward getting his jollies from behind a keyboard. The emotion this time around is amusement.

On the contrary, don't think I''ve ever "bagged" any U.S. person on here except for Trump. The other day I was highlighting their new stealth sub, quoting Vince Lombardi etc.
But then again your tendency to twist facts and figures was pointed out in the property thread by a few people recently.

Wow. You ask him for his definition of Science, then criticize him for asking you for yours.
You love this keyboard warrior stuff don't you!

Splitting hairs now are we. To quote your post: "would me knowing what science is, make so much as a single iota of difference to you?", in response to his post 393.

You love asking questions (trolling) but providing no substance.

It's a poor excuse for a Human who takes pleasure in taunting others. It's a poor excuse for a Man who does it from behind a keyboard. But that's you!

Perhaps provide some substance.
You do not show others courtesy by your continued trolling. You will be shown the same respect you afford others.

Cynic logic: "don't insult me but I'm allowed to insult you", "I can ask you a question but you aren't allowed to ask me a similar one".

You started trolling me way back when you started the continued "Lucifer" and "repent" comments. Geez, I've provided more Science than you, the self appointed expert, trolling others.

Your trolling of this thread, of both myself and others has been continuous - far greater than you deceitfully try to claim now. You are unfortunately a person who appears to enjoy taunting others, from behind a keyboard.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I illustrate the behaviour of a genuine Troll.
He inflames, irritates and adds virtually no value to any thread with this sort of behaviour.
This is is the sort of behaviour that can derail a thread and drive it into flaming arguments and name calling which so distress Joe and the other intelligent people here. If you have no respect for others DK, at least have some respect for Joe.

We have some highly intelligent people here with a good balance of opposing views. It makes for an interesting debate for the readers.

DK, unless you can 'value add' to a thread, please stay off it, Trolls are not welcome here on ASF.

 

[Darc Knight]

Ah Ann, everytime I or anyone else would try to post, your friend Cynic would troll with references to "Lucifer", "repenting" or generally try to continually find any nonsensical and non existent hole in anyone's argument without contributing anything of substance.

 

[Knobby22]

Spoken like a true "climate scientist".

That's the great thing about religion! One doesn't need to heed one's critics! All one needs do, is promptly dismiss them via accusations of heresy, and thereafter pay such heretics no mind!

There you go again, invoke religion when you are the one with "faith" and no science. I know I am just feeding the troll.

 

[sptrawler]

But then again your tendency to twist facts and figures was pointed out in the property thread by a few people recently.

That's a bit hurtful, lol, no one on ASF would do that, we are all paragons of virtue.

 

[Junior]

Should this thread be closed, or perhaps the last couple of pages deleted? There is nothing of substance being posted here any more.

 

[rederob]

There you go again, invoke religion when you are the one with "faith" and no science. I know I am just feeding the troll.

Doubt it Knobby: there was no word salad to regurgitate.

 

[Smurf1976]

Ladies and gentlemen, may I illustrate the behaviour of a genuine Troll.
He inflames, irritates and adds virtually no value to any thread with this sort of behaviour.
This is is the sort of behaviour that can derail a thread and drive it into flaming arguments and name calling which so distress Joe and the other intelligent people here. If you have no respect for others DK, at least have some respect for Joe.

I'll keep out of the "personal" discussion as I generally do but I'll say that in my opinion the great value and point of difference with ASF is that it has a history of civilized and polite discussion despite at times strongly opposing viewpoints.

 

[rederob]

Should this thread be closed, or perhaps the last couple of pages deleted? There is nothing of substance being posted here any more.

Specific links to climate science articles or directly about climate science since page 19 inclusive are found at the following posts"
363
376
381
384
388
399
391
A number of replies referenced these, and there was also a question on weather from Smurf.
cynic's contribution on science per se appears to be nil.
Given science is being linked in the last few pages, closing the thread seems premature.
Peripheral posts are largely about certain posters seemingly able to add little, or visibly adding nothing of merit. This latter category will only diminish in reputation unless they want to be other than irrelevant.

 

[Ann]

Should this thread be closed, or perhaps the last couple of pages deleted? There is nothing of substance being posted here any more.

I would hope not Junior. I think it is important to see Trolls in action and how they can cause problems and encourage poor quality posts from people who follow the Troll.

I am hoping to get back here shortly and looking forward to some valuable discourse. I have learned so much about a subject which was barely a blip on my radar a short time ago. Now we have Rederob back and in so many ways he adds value to a thread and a forum. I also have enormous respect for Cynic, not forgetting basilio and WayneL and so many more good and valuable posters.

Off topic to Cynic, an anagram of Lucifer is Flueric

Flueric partial pressure sensors


Abstract

A flueric partial pressure sensor includes a flueric bridge having two bridge legs adapted for sensing a reference-gas and sample-gas mixture. A linear resistor and an orifice resistor are incorporated in each of the bridge legs which are conjoined to discharge from a single outlet. The resistors are arranged to provide an asymmetric balance of the flow rates through the bridge legs. The asymmetric balance is selected so that in operation a constant pressure output signal is generated for a chosen partial pressure of a constituent gas of the sample-gas mixture in varying absolute pressure conditions such as changes in altitude. Respective pressure signal outlets connected one with each bridge leg at a position between the linear resistor and the orifice resistor are used to effect control of a flueric laminar flow proportional amplifier.

Lucifer/flueric just sounds like a boring old fart to my dyslexic mind.

 

[Darc Knight]

Sorry guys. Cynic's taunting and nonsensical attacks on other people's posts was akin to bullying. It had gotten to the stage @rederob had stopped replying to him - which I guess was a part of Cynics tactic.
Wherever I see bullying, online or IRL I'll call it out, as should others.

 

[Smurf1976]

Wherever I see bullying, online or IRL I'll call it out, as should others.

I haven't read all the comments but agreed in principle that yes anyone should call out bullying and that should be done no matter who the bully is.