Reply With Quote
Is the entire globe located at the 65N line of la ude? No? Ok. Once again you manage to show your idiocy. I know you didn't know because you don't know . Keep digging.
Is the entire globe located at the 65N line of la ude? No? Ok. Once again you manage to show your idiocy. I know you didn't know because you don't know . Keep digging.
What is your basis for this claim?
Yes...
In your first quote, I'm saying 1.7% is more of a reduction than needed.
In the second, I am saying that the 6 watt/sq meter of cooling puts us at a lower total radiative forcing than before anthropogenic warming... Puts us at a "lesser" radiative forcing level than what anthropogenic warming "added."
Don't you know how to read?
Keep throwing this ty assumptions, instead of adding value.
Ever read the IPCC AR4?
I disagree with this number, but that is what the AGW Alarmist Bible says.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 10-11-2012 at 03:28 AM.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the bar that says "Total Net Anthropogenic" is at 1.6.
Don't you know how to write?
If you disagree with the number then why are you citing it? Don't you know how to argue?
Yes, I know how to argue, and part of that is using the oppositions material against them.
I guess you would never be smart enough to understand where I was going to go with what I was going to say next. I see that since you are incapable of an actual debate, instead, you keep pounding away with talk.
let me know if you would actually like to debate.
Your using that as the basis of an argument. You are saying that the scientists that are proposing the asteroid thing are incorrect on the basis of something that IPCC said. You are saying that IPCC is right. You aren't arguing about IPCC or their conclusions. You are using their conclusions as the basis for your argument.
So do you believe in the numbers that IPCC gives or are you just talking out of your ass?
So let me get this straight.
1) You say something stupid and oversiplified65N
2) You are called on your stupidity
3) You say that you were going to say something else and he should have anticipated it
4) You don't say .
That's a pretty stupid train of thought you have going on there.
I believe the number. I just don't believe it is all anthropogenic, but that much of it is natural.
You have no clue what my train of though is, so it is so ing laughable that you are arguing against a point I have not yet made. That was a first question of a multiple question game I was going to play with Manny, but he was too stupid to answer the first. You are too, so I won't bother. I'll just say this. When 65N is +8%, what is 65S?So let me get this straight.
1) You say something stupid and oversiplified
2) You are called on your stupidity
3) You say that you were going to say something else and he should have anticipated it
4) You don't say .
That's a pretty stupid train of thought you have going on there.
Agloco 5
Wild Cobra 18
FuzzyLumpkins 13
MannyIsGod 5
Lol
Laughing at what you don't understand by chance?
How is 65S different than 65N?
Do you know?
Are you serious? Coming from the guy who couldn't figure out how the north pole and the south pole are different? Are you honestly thinking you know more about any earth science than I do, WC?
man, this forum is great for a laugh. Look how hard you try to get acceptance WC.
Always the clown, aren't you Manny.
Evasive... Never answering the question, only focusing on finding fault. I guess that means you don't know.
at least he knows how to put his words in a sentence that makes some sense despite not having a college degree.
Are you serious? Coming from the guy who couldn't figure out how the north pole and the south pole are different? Are you honestly thinking you know more about any earth science than I do, WC?
man, this forum is great for a laugh. Look how hard you try to get acceptance WC.
Yeah WC. I don't know. Please, teach me. I'm eagerly awaiting. Thanks in advance.
First tell me. When the 65N insolation is 8% higher than average, what is the 65S insolation, or do you not know?
WC, the reason you get bitten around the ankles is that you keep wading into waters you are not familiar with, and you are not sharing your knowledge but doing on the fly internet searches and trying to hit the respond button on Spurstalk Jeopardy before anyone else does. Anyone here can Google and reword , that's just filler material that doesn't lead to a productive discussion since you cannot expound on it without further digging.
There are some things you just don't know, but you seem to lack the ability to ever admit it, thus your sore ankles.
Also, no matter the authority, you pretend to know better. I saw you once tell Kori that her lifetime experience with Muslim women is inaccurate, that you know more about it. You did that after she revealed to you how she knew what she was saying was true and you did so in a "Yabut" way. You're basically ST Cliff Claven.
if I know. Teach me.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
