Yo RBT,
You have been on quite a roll this week-did someoe rechage you Starbucks card?

Did they call in reinforcments from the nut bregade or did they hook up wy-fi at the nut house, the trolls are a moving around like a wack-a -mole!

Bob666 says, “You have been on quite a roll this week-did someone recharge your Starbucks card??

Nah, have a cold and can’t go to the gym, weather’s been bad, so spending a little more time with the nut brigade. So much ignorance, so little time to deal with it.

Yo RBT,
“So much ignorance, so little time to deal with it’

I would concur, there are some real winners here.

RBT said: Thank you JAY, for giving us another fine sounding piece of horsepucky from a totally non-credible source.

As if you’re a “Credible” source?

“As if you’re a “Credible” source?”, asks the kid who won’t go home?

As a matter of fact, yes. And it’s a sign if your ignorance and noncredibility that you would even challenge me. I didn’t make any of that up. If you weren’t such a lazy know-nothing loudmouth that just likes to hear himself talk, you could go look up Harris, the ICSC, the Frontier Group, The Heartland Institute, High Park, and the funding of the denier groups by the fossil fuel interests yourself. No wonder they don’t pick you for any teams.

RBT……You ever thought about therapy? If you’re looking for someone to nursemaid your out of control feminine ego…..well…..it ain’t me!

You’re a progressive school teacher, nothing more, nothing less.

Get a life! Nobody is buying this PC BS!

Spoken like a true loser, APN Just childish insults because you can’t come up with better. Why didn’t you do as I suggested and go look some things up so you could speak intelligently? I will help you understand them if they are beyond your knowledge base.

You are the one who needs to get a life! A life that includes using that wonderful tool you have been given—-the brain.

Limousine Liberal Hypocrisy

Goldman Sachs has been one of the most aggressive firms on Wall Street about taking action on climate change; the company sends its bankers home at night in hybrid limousines. –The New York Times, Feb. 25

Written without a hint of irony–if only your neighborhood dry cleaner sent his employees home by hybrid limousine–this front-page dispatch captured perfectly the eco-pretensions of the rich and the stupefying gullibility with which they are received.

Remember the Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore global-warming pitch at the Academy Awards? Before they spoke, the screen at the back of the stage flashed not-so-subliminal messages about how to save the planet. My personal favorite was “Ride mass transit.” This to a conclave of Hollywood plutocrats who have not seen the inside of a subway since the moon landing and for whom mass transit means a stretch limo seating no fewer than 10.

Leo and Al then portentously announced that for the first time ever, the Academy Awards ceremony had gone green. What did that mean? Solar panels in the designer gowns? It turns out that the Academy neutralized the evening’s “carbon footprint” by buying carbon credits. That means it sent money to a “carbon broker,” who promised, after taking his cut, to reduce carbon emissions somewhere on the planet equivalent to what the stars spewed into the atmosphere while flying in on their private planes.

In other words, the rich reduce their carbon output by not one ounce. But drawing on the hundreds of millions of net worth in the Kodak Theatre, they pull out lunch money to buy ecological indulgences. The last time the selling of pardons was prevalent–in a predecessor religion to environmentalism called Christianity–Martin Luther lost his temper and launched the Reformation.

A very few of the very rich have some awareness of the emptiness–if not the medieval corruption–of ransoming one’s sins. Sergey Brin, zillionaire founder of Google, buys carbon credits to offset the ghastly amount of carbon dioxide emitted by Google’s private Boeing 767 but confesses he’s not sure if it really does anything.

Which puts him one step ahead of most other eco-preeners who actually pretend that it does–the Goracle himself, for example. His Tennessee mansion consumes 20 times the electricity used by the average American home. Monthly it consumes twice as much power as the average home consumes in a year. Gore buys absolution, however. He spends pocket change on carbon credits, which then allow him to pollute conscience-free.

What is wrong with this scam? First, purchasing carbon credits is an incentive to burn even more fossil fuels, since now it is done under the illusion that it’s really cost-free to the atmosphere.

Second, it is a way for the rich to export the real costs and sacrifices of pollution control to the poorer segments of humanity in the Third World. (Apparently, Hollywood’s plan is to make up for that by adopting every last one of their children.) For example, GreenSeat, a Dutch carbon-trading outfit, buys offsets from a foundation that plants trees in Uganda’s Mount Elgon National Park to soak up the carbon emissions of its rich Western patrons. Small problem: expanding the park encroaches on land traditionally used by local farmers. As a result, reports the New York Times, “villagers living along the boundary of the park have been beaten and shot at, and their livestock has been confiscated by armed park rangers.” All this so that swimming pools can be heated and Maseratis driven with a clear conscience in the fattest parts of the world.

The other form of carbon trading is to get Third World companies to cut their emissions to offset Western pollution. The reason this doesn’t work–and why the carbon racket is a farce–is that you need a cap for cap-and-trade to work. Sulfur dioxide emissions in the U.S. were capped, and the trading system succeeded in reducing acid rain by half. But even the Kyoto treaty doesn’t put any cap on greenhouse gases in China and India, where billions of these carbon credits are traded. Sure, you can pretend you’re offsetting Western greenhouse pollution by supposedly cleaning up a dirty coal plant in China. But China is adding a new coal plant every week. You could build a particularly dirty “uncapped” power plant, then sell hundreds of millions in carbon credits to reduce it to a normal rate of pollution. The result? The polluter gets very rich. The planet continues to cook. And the Gores of the world can feel virtuous as they burn up the local power grid.

If Gore really wants to save the planet, he can try this: Turn off the lights. Ditch the heated pool. Ride the subway. And spare us the carbon-trading piety. -Charles Krauthammer
by Taboola

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1599714,00.html#ixzz2LUaapFU7

WTS… I’m no fan of Gore or the Carbon Cap n Trap BS…. You and I know that, that alone does not discount that we must eventually stop burning fossil fuels!!! We need to start promoting the idea that this is a challenge that can be met in a decade rather than looking for the next loophole(s) to exploit or giving VOICE to the continuous political BS artists that just can’t seem to get over it!!!!… FOSSIL FUELS are DEAD… Let’s leave them that way before they take US with them!!!

Ah, yes, a long quote from Charles Krauthammer, a very smart and devious man who is good at distorting truth for right wing purposes. One of JAY’s sometime heros (of course, not when JAY is feeling bipolar and leaning “leftish”). Read this several times and between the lines folks, or you may miss the point.

Seriously APN…. You decipher sarcasm so well… You did make yourself an easy target. I am glad I could invoke such a predictable response though…. You know nothing about me but you kickly moved to make this about my values and education while ignoring the facts. Now if you would like to enter into a purely intelectual report then bring it on. I asked you pointed questions, which you are avoiding, or positing unfounded claims to which you have no clue…..showy…but unimportant….. so what is it… witt or more witt?

“Also, I made a HUGE profit over that 30 years and I EARNED IT, The AMERICAN way!!!!!!”

DPG may not have had his reading glasses on, and may not have noticed the above from APN

APN is apparently quite proud of himself for making a HUGE profit.(translation– “obscene” profit), and having EARNED it (translation–”APN got lucky and was in the right place at the right time”), and doing it the AMERICAN way (translation–”by taking more than his fair share and contributing to the losses of many others when the dot.com bubble burst”).

Yes, APN sounds like a REAL American when he talks like this—–one of the 1%. I wonder if his HUGE profit was obscene enough that I can lump him in with the “greedy rich”? Wouldn’t surprise me if it was—-he certainly sounds like one of them—-or maybe he just likes to hear himself talk and really doesn’t have the proverbial pot to urinate in?.

Simple minded PAUL said: You know nothing about me but you kickly moved to make this about my values and education while ignoring the facts.

I know plenty about you based upon your comments. Your comments speak volumes about your misguided “facts”. Facts that are baseless skewed by those who seek to assert power over mankind’s activities on a planet given to them by GOD, not GREEDY POWER Hungry men.

Again, let’s see your “facts” concerning this planetary phenomenon called “Global Warming”.

Bottom line, you don’t have any and you never will because the evidence of what very limited data we have on this subject says the CONTRARY, and that is a FACT.

Sale this voodoo communist crap to someone without a brain.

Right Brain FEELER said: APN is apparently quite proud of himself for making a HUGE profit.(translation– “obscene” profit), and having EARNED it (translation–”APN got lucky and was in the right place at the right time”), and doing it the AMERICAN way (translation–”by taking more than his fair share and contributing to the losses of many others when the dot.com bubble burst”).

Did those comments make you “Feel Good” about yourself RBT? You ASSUME much and understand VERY little.

I didn’t get lucky doing anything in life my friend. HARD WORK was the key to my success and you nor any other progressive for that matter will get any apology from me.

But I’m sure if I had a life’s mediator LIKE YOU, Hitler or ODUMBO to keep me from taking more than my “fair share” it would have prevented the dot.com bubble!!

By the way, Mr. Naive, my successes in life had nothing to do with the dot.com bubble. I saw that coming years before it happened. What I did in my career was at the micro-code level and assembly language not some DUMB Webpage template programmer that calls themselves an IT expert. You ever WONDER who wrote the underlying code for all these toys we use?

Again, educate yourself before your say dumb things as you continually “Feel” your way though your progressively pathetic LAZY life.

THINKING requires concentration and discipline of which you seem to have neither.

I missed this one. APN has apparently been losing it since early this morning:

“LIKE YOU, Hitler or ODUMBO”, he says? Yep definitely losing it, as anyone demonstrates who mentions Hitler or twists the president’s name rather than speak intelligently about anything. I hope you find you way back soon, APN.

I’m right here RBT. I haven’t gone anywhere and don’t plan on doing so.

I’ve always had a mental capacity to see through silly fools like you a nanosecond.

You and the progs are just lazy greedy control-freeks that spend your entire existence at the expense of others.

What you have to understand about RBT, APN, is that, if you’re one of those global warming deniers, you shouldn’t be allowed to have an opinion because you don’t have enough expertise in climate science, or if you do, you should have your credentials stripped from you because you’ve proven yourself unworthy to have them. On the other hand, if you support the theory of anthropogenic global warming, it doesn’t matter what credentials you have or don’t have, your opinion is vital and true. Case in point: Professor Richard Parncutt of the University of Graz stated: Global Warming “Deniers” Should be Executed…! The funny thing is, Professor Parncutt isn’t even a climate scientist. He teaches Systematic Musicology.

So what did this professor actually say? You can read his entire rant here. http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/prof-richard-parncutt-death-penalty-for-global-warming-deniers/

Here’s an excerpt from the beginning:

“In this article I am going to suggest that the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for influential GW [global warming] deniers. But before coming to this surprising conclusion, please allow me to explain where I am coming from.”

He then goes on to explain that he’s actually opposed to the imposition of the death penalty in general. He doesn’t believe that everyday murderers should receive such a “barbaric” sentence, that not even mass murderers deserve it. He referred to the Norwegian mass murderer Behring Breivik who killed 77 people last year and said that “if the Norwegian government killed him, that would just increase the number of dead to 78.”

He said that putting him and other murderers to death won’t bring back the people that were slain, as if that’s the point of the death penalty. Then he moves on to the “deniers”:

“GW deniers fall into a completely different category from Behring Breivik. They are already causing the deaths of hundreds of millions of future people. We could be speaking of billions, but I am making a conservative estimate… With high probability it will cause hundreds of millions of deaths. For this reason I propose that the death penalty is appropriate for influential GW deniers. More generally, I propose that we limit the death penalty to people whose actions will with a high probability cause millions of future deaths… I wish to claim that it is generally ok to kill someone in order to save one million people. Similarly, the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for GW deniers who are so influential that one million future deaths can with high probability be traced to their personal actions. Please note also that I am only talking about prevention of future deaths – not punishment or revenge after the event.”

He thinks that maybe in 40 years, even the Pope will see him as a saint for his courage in suggesting such a penalty for those who dare to question the official narrative of climate change:

“Right now, in the year 2012, these ideas will seem quite crazy to most people. People will be saying that Parncutt has finally lost it. But there is already enough evidence on the table to allow me to make the following prediction: If someone found this document in the year 2050 and published it, it would find general support and admiration. People would say I was courageous to write the truth, for a change. Who knows, perhaps the Pope would even turn me into a saint.”

There’s a lot more in his rant that is worth pointing out, but there’s just not enough time to discuss it. It’s becoming clearer what the agenda is regarding just about any official narrative spouted off by the media and government. If you dare to even question them, they will view you as the worst kind of criminal there is, even worse than terrorists and mass murderers. And speaking of penalizing those who cause the deaths of millions of future people, isn’t it ironic that he doesn’t say one word about abortion?

So you see, APN. When you are engaging in debate with the likes of RBT and his ilk, you are in essence dealing with deranged and highly unstable individuals, who would cut your throat in a second, if they had the chance, for denying man-made global-warming. But, you could be a bum living in a cardboard box in D.C. with an 8th grade education and believe that man is causing the earth to warm, and that if the “lords” over in the D.C. castle don’t “do something” about it, humanity will be wiped out, and it will be the fault of all those “deniers.” And that poor bum’s opinion will have more respect than the climate scientists with 18 Ph.D.’s who believe the only thing that’s man-made about anthropogenic global warming is the theory itself. Take RBT with a grain of salt, APN, and have some pity on him. The poor sap is deranged!

WTS/JAY said: ” If you dare to even question them, they will view you as the worst kind of criminal there is, even worse than terrorists and mass murderers. And speaking of penalizing those who cause the deaths of millions of future people, isn’t it ironic that he doesn’t say one word about abortion?”

Excellent post! Very factual! I appreciate the link as well.

This is the primary reason I refer to these GW Libtards as self-appointed “gods of the planet”. RBT is your typical socialist/progressive elite minded individual that couldn’t think his way out of a wet paper bag. He spews all this GW junk without any credentials to do so much less any actual science to support his mythical claims. People with this type mindset have a tendency to assert “Feelings” as factual data and then get angry when us lesser folks challenge the validity of their “well felt out” intentions.

I was taught that thinking requires concentration and to QUESTION anything and everything regardless of the source. i.e. TRUST but VERIFY This includes those we elect for pubic office and those who teach our children.

Now, this entire subject is about nothing more than CONTROLLING the masses so the elites can enjoy the fruits of this earth while we commoners site at home frustrated trying to figure out how to pay the next GREEN ENERGY BILL, FOOD BILL or GAS BILL.

Bottom line, this is THEIR planet, and POWER/GREED/CONTROL over other peoples lives is the predominant driving factor in this entire equation. It has everything to do with this continual PC Marxist progressive movement in this country and has nothing to do with SCIENCE!

Sick people and history has a LONG LIST of folks just like them, AND, the results never CHANGE……Misery, death and destruction for those who do not agree with their “Good Intentions” for we commoners. The link you gave me is evidence of how these Libtards “Think” and what their REAL intentions truly are.

APN… You think you could just turn off the seething Political retoric, the bashing, the name calling, the disrespectful assumptions and actually be involved in a real discussion of the facts or are you so determined to stop action on all real climate science that does not support YOUR position that you just can’t stand the thought of possibly being wrong about some of fringe (far right and far left) bs that is so obvious to most? I understand that you think all of this about somebody getting filthy rich off Carbon Cap n trade on the backs of the poor worker…. But that’s exactly what the coal and oil industries have done for the last 2 centuries!!!… And on top of that Very few people actually ‘died’ when we stopped using coal fired steam locomotives…. Most Everyone found new jobs….. I do see your concern that this could turn into a another way to rape the working class…. But you seem to fail to see that if we do not act now and the climate science is in fact correct, then by nothing we have left the future with the certainty of a high probability for disasterous consequences….

Nice try DPG! I am a FREE AMERICAN living on a planet supplied to me by GOD, not men. I have no intentions of living under the Marxist rule of some progressive FOOL who perceives themselves as a “god” through THEIR “science”.

Once again, you cannot prove your assertions and have NO CLUE what tomorrow will bring. GOD does, you don’t, and never will.

Good luck getting your team leader, Mr. Gore, to turn in his Jets, multiple Mansions, Huge Gas Guzzling RV’s, etc etc etc., so we can then “Save the Planet” from GOD’s people.

APN

Yo ADP,
Been looking at your post for the past couple of days. you are one angry dude and the when you do make a valid point, people don’t see it over the anger.
Just saying…….

APN…. Since you seem to have a direct line to GOD then please tell us all about what the future holds for us and the climate and if that’s not possible how about just sticking to the subject matter….

DPG said: APN…. Since you seem to have a direct line to GOD then please tell us all about what the future holds for us and the climate and if that’s not possible how about just sticking to the subject matter….

GOD the Father will not reveal to any MAN when the final chapter will be opened and then executed. I’m a Christian not a “Religious Fanatic”. Big difference and I will leave the “fanatics” to the fools both religious and science fields. I see very little difference in the two. One worships a false god and the other worships a MONKEY called EVOLUTION.

I also believe that science can be a good thing or a VERY BAD thing especially when that science asserts it’s superiority over GOD. Our Founder Fathers understood this concept very clearly.

GOD has the power to makes FOOLS of those who attempt to assert powers they do not possess. Since my rights to live on this planet comes directly from GOD, well DPG, I guess that means that I do in fact have a DIRECT line to GOD. Does your scientific mind comprehend that statement or do I need to explain it further.

GOD “is” the subject when it comes to this planet, he created it and you nor will 6-7 BILLION humans destroy it by simply living on it. It was DESIGNED for us to live on it until the predetermined END TIMES and your “Science” will not and cannot change that fact.

I know DPG that you perceive yourself, through your man made science, as someone who can predict the future. You may even have good intentions through your science but your efforts will end with NOTHING other than the stark reality that you are not in control of this planet nor can you predict when it will end due to “Climate Change”.

I’m sure this factor and the truth of the matter is very frustrating to you. I do in fact have a line to GOD, through his SON CHRIST JESUS and you nor Al Gore will replace him in that capacity.

Only a FOOL could look around him at this creation and not understand that a HIGHER POWER not only created it but OWNS IT and CONTROLS IT.

Otherwise, our great scientists could prevent a rock the size of TEXAS from falling from outerspace striking the earth at 33,000 MPH thus resulting in a ELE.Or perhaps you have figured out how to stop the next chain of volcanic eruptions from occurring thus preventing us from going into the next Ice Age.

Let not you hearts be troubled with such foolish earthly things. Things that are well beyond your human capacities and control.

APN

APN….. There you go again making assumptions rather than just answering the question!! However this time will be different…….

Now it’s my turn…..My comments and questions are between the ******** below

APN Said:
GOD the Father will not reveal to any MAN when the final chapter will be opened and then executed. I’m a Christian not a “Religious Fanatic”. Big difference and I will leave the “fanatics” to the fools both religious and science fields. I see very little difference in the two. One worships a false god and the other worships a MONKEY called EVOLUTION.

****************
Are you Positive about that entire statement APN? I see very little difference between you and any other Christian religious fanatic…. Did you forget this: God gave Mankind the gift of being ‘like’ HIM… We were ‘made’ in HIS own ‘image’… What do you suppose God meant by that?
****************
APN Said:
I also believe that science can be a good thing or a VERY BAD thing especially when that science asserts it’s superiority over GOD. Our Founder Fathers understood this concept very clearly.

****************
Where did I break God’s Laws by declaring that Science was my god? At the ‘end times’ HE shall pour HIS Knowlege over all of Mankind……. (that includes science)
****************
APN Said:
GOD has the power to makes FOOLS of those who attempt to assert powers they do not possess. Since my rights to live on this planet comes directly from GOD, well DPG, I guess that means that I do in fact have a DIRECT line to GOD. Does your scientific mind comprehend that statement or do I need to explain it further.

****************
No you don’t…. “No MAN shall Know the hour or the day of HIS RETURN” Furthermore: “He shall come as a thief in the Night”… How do know that you did not miss HIM? YOU may have been left behind because you FAILED to recognize HIM…. He said there would be ‘signs’ and to be watchfull….
****************
APN Said:
GOD “is” the subject when it comes to this planet, he created it and you nor will 6-7 BILLION humans destroy it by simply living on it. It was DESIGNED for us to live on it until the predetermined END TIMES and your “Science” will not and cannot change that fact.

***************
I have not ever claimed that humans would destroy the planet! They do however, have the ability to really mess it up!!!
***************
APN Said:
I know DPG that you perceive yourself, through your man made science, as someone who can predict the future. You may even have good intentions through your science but your efforts will end with NOTHING other than the stark reality that you are not in control of this planet nor can you predict when it will end due to “Climate Change”.

**************
How could you possibly know that I am ‘just’ a man of science? Do you read minds? I do not pretend to predict the future, but God says nothing about us not being able to understand what could happen. I have made no claim that I or anyone else ‘is’ in control of the planet. That is your FEAR!!
**************
APN Said:
I’m sure this factor and the truth of the matter is very frustrating to you. I do in fact have a line to GOD, through his SON CHRIST JESUS and you nor Al Gore will replace him in that capacity.

**************
I can’t speak for Al Gore!! However, Neither I or any MAN can attain the seat on the Right Hand Of GOD…(Nor Can I ever hope to have DIRECT two way communications with HIM!!) That SEAT belongs to the SON of GOD…. I am but one of HIS servants.
**************
APN Said:
Only a FOOL could look around him at this creation and not understand that a HIGHER POWER not only created it but OWNS IT and CONTROLS IT.

**************
I concure!! However, we do have free will and this planet was given to US to have Dominion over, to care for and to NURTURE, If we are to obey our MASTER (GOD) then we must DO SO and not bicker amongst ouselves and be a burden to the ALMIGHTY!!
**************
APN Said:
Otherwise, our great scientists could prevent a rock the size of TEXAS from falling from outerspace striking the earth at 33,000 MPH thus resulting in a ELE.Or perhaps you have figured out how to stop the next chain of volcanic eruptions from occurring thus preventing us from going into the next Ice Age.

**************
Pehaps someday we will, unless we allow fanatisim to rule and science to be lost. There are notable accounts in Genisis… Then there are the ‘Dark Ages, the Inquisition, WW1 and 2…. Perhaps a review is in order?
**************
APN Said:
Let not you hearts be troubled with such foolish earthly things. Things that are well beyond your human capacities and control.

**************
As we develop new technologies and better science I believe that it is possible to correct many of the things that trouble us today and the fear of these things,due to missunderstanding, will go by the wayside.
**************
NOW CAN WE GET BACK TO THE SUBJECT MATTER?

DPG said: NOW CAN WE GET BACK TO THE SUBJECT MATTER?

You just did or are you so puffed up by your intellect that you didn’t realize it?

APN…. REALLY??? That’s your BEST response???

DPG, I really don’t have the energy or the desire to go through your rebuttal line item by line item. Either you do believe in GOD or you don’t? Either you put your faith in GOD or put you misguided beliefs in your man-made science, which is it?

Being the GOD FEARING intellect you are, do you actually think that human activities on this planet is a major contributing factor of GW that will create GREAT suffering of GOD’s people UNLESS we allow WASHINGTON or some other GLOBAL body to regular our activities?

If the answer to that question is YES, well, I suspect that you are a fake and a fraud, and the seed that you sow will fall upon shallow ground.

But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Matthew 10:33

APN

To APM,
Angry with god-Great Combanation.

APN…. I’m so sorry that you don’t have the energy to respond to each every point that I placed before you, even though you had placed them before me, I just thought a little light on the topics might help to clear the air…. You know … cleanse the landscape of unnecesary social debris…

And ahhhh….. WOW… I think most here might agree that your dead on accurate reasoning and superficially not so elequent retorts are just……. chicken splat…..

You know…. that narly lookin’ splotch on the road, over by your neighbor, where Darwin won and the chicken didn’t…..

OOOOooooo sorry… where God smote the foul fowl for transgressing the Knights Templars’ road……

To Bob/Mark of the beast:

Do you comprehend the significance of the numbers 666?

Yo APN,
As a matter of fact- I comprehend it quite well. I also comprehend what people can read into three consistent numbers.

Here is the part that will blow your mind-the government gave those three numbers to me along with a few others-the last three of my selective service number. Then, when I went to college-they were the last three of my student ID number and finally, when I got my first real job for a major corporation, they were the last three of my employee ID number and It became a family joke the has stuck.

Now, does that make you feel more or less threatened by those three numbers? like the lotto-they are just random numbers and it amuses me haw they strike fear into people. To me, they are just random numbers and they should be the no more to you or anyone else.

APN is taken in by WTS/JAY’s wonderful imitation of Goebbels and states

“Excellent post! Very factual! I appreciate the link as well” APN shows his usual mindless parroting of talking points and berates ME about being “without any credentials to do so much less any actual science to support his mythical claims”. APN then goes into a multi-paragraph diatribe that mentions NO science of ANY kind, shows NO credentials on his part for anything other than a big mouth and inability to keep it shut, and is really just unsupported political opinion (and weak political opinion at that). Is APN that lacking in self awareness?

He is certainly lacking in self-awareness when he states (paraphrased a bit), “People with APN’s mindset have a tendency to assert “Feelings” as factual data and then get angry when better educated folks challenge the validity of their “well felt out” intentions”. Doesn’t he see that he is talking about himself there?

Perhaps not, perhaps his problem is just low intelligence, because sating “The link you gave me is evidence of how these Libtards “Think” and what their REAL intentions truly are” is just plain DUMB..

Bob666,

That is a mind blower. If I were you I would buy a lottery ticket and just maybe you will hit it big on your prime number 666.

Also, I do not feel threatened by the number 666. I do however understand it’s significance from a biblical standpoint and how it relates to current times.

Fascinating story….

APN

Yo APN,
if it had been 444,888, 777 555 or what ever, I woud use it. As far as the Lotto goes, been there and aint won that yet. Maybe there is a statistical limit that I have reached.

Hey Bob,

Yea, the lotto is a losing proposition in my opinion. Probably have a better chance of getting struck by lightning.

Have a good day.

APN

DPG, you seem to be uncomfortable in your own skin. Little touchy aren’t you. By the way, your last post proves my point, very clearly in fact.

APN

APN…. I have never felt more comfortable in own skin!!!

“By the way, your last post proves my point, very clearly in fact”.

Really?? I’m shocked that you too agree that your ‘dead on accurate reasoning’ and ‘superficially not so elequent retorts’ are just……. chicken splat…..

Does this imply that we can move on?

Any chance you might actually be ready to discuss AACC now or should I wait for you to reboot your brain?

DPG said: Any chance you might actually be ready to discuss AACC now or should I wait for you to reboot your brain?

Only if you mean the American Association of Christian Counselors.

…and why would I need to reboot by brain when trying to communicate with your EGO?

Basically I consider you to be arrogantly stupid, and well as, spiritually naive.

APN

PS> Time to get back to your rock isn’t it and watch the sun set over YOUR mountains.

APN…. Enjoy your little tirads on here…. When ANYONE is ready to cut the crap and get down to the real buisiness of discussing AACC, ACCC, AGW or whatever new terminology pops up next I’ll be watching and will respond then….

This is NOT about taxing people that work!!! This is about the moral objective given to all humans to share what we learn with the belief that we can do the right things to promote a world capable of sustaining, with abundance, our progeny ad infinitum… To do this we must inspect every way that we evaluate the ‘how’ and ‘by when’ that these rightful things get done…. this inculdes but may not be limited to WHAT WE DO TO OUR ENVIRONMENT….. It would be best to avoid the politics, posturing, and flat out whitewashing of the sciences just because they do not agree with your agenda…. Religiosity seems to eb unavoidable no matter what…. I’m here to support facts….. and to provide the best arguments for the sciences… as are others that are truely concerned.

We must assume that the handle “2forE” somehow references a concern for “proper” word spelling and English usage, because 2forE has wasted valuable space here with his nitpicking. DPG’s meaning was perfectly clear. He, like me, is probably more concerned with truth, CONTENT, clarity of message, and expressing supported opinions rather than mindless spouting of dogma and “cuteness”. Speaking of “cuteness”, who exactly claimed an IQ of 297? And are you aware that the numbers commonly used to reference IQ don’t go anywhere near that high? And speaking of “clarity of message?, my IQ is only around 140 so I’m perhaps handicapped. What does this mean? “. …PEOPLE WHO KNOW that Carbon Dioxide is not an evil greenhouse gas that should be taxed, PEOPLE WHO WORK for a living, and PEOPLE WHO EARN……… money for doing so”.?????

And could you also explain how you came up with the idea of an “evil gas”? Is that like a “fart in church”?

DPG makes a great statement. I support his thinking 100%, since I too am “truely” concerned about the future of the human race and all living things on the planet. “This is NOT about taxing people that work!!! This is about the moral objective given to all humans to share what we learn with the belief that we can do the right things to promote a world capable of sustaining, with abundance, our progeny ad infinitum… To do this we must inspect every way that we evaluate the ‘how’ and ‘by when’ that these rightful things get done…. this inculdes but may not be limited to WHAT WE DO TO OUR ENVIRONMENT….. It would be best to avoid the politics, posturing, and flat out whitewashing of the sciences just because they do not agree with your agenda…. Religiosity seems to eb unavoidable no matter what…. I’m here to support facts….. and to provide the best arguments for the sciences… as are others that are truely concerned”

Of course, the fact that DPG made TWO typos by transposing letters and added one extra letter to a word will give 2forE an opportunity to waste more time “correcting” DPG, rather than addressing what DPG says. 2forE will fit in nicely on PLD—-he has popped out of the standard “mold” and is demonstrating that to all. .

Well ole Eddiedumbo, I would rather have my head in the sand with a group of HONEST people capable of logical reasoning than have my head up the tail end of a Jackaxx in the sand!

You dumb progessives never cease to amaze me. Childish and foolish is an understatement! Must be the THC chemical factor, you THINK!

Keep trying to sale this voodoo science to the kids! Pool people is all I can say!

LMAO!!!!

APN shows us that he is a master of smugness, condescension, dismissiveness, and mindlessness—————-by saying NOTHING of substance.

Eddiedumbo?
Some DIShonest people must be capable of logical reasoning. (Not APN though, he’s just dishonest)
Can’t APN find a jackass closer to home to stick his head in rather than having to go find one in the sand somewhere? (unless he lives at the beach or in the desert?)
You dumb progessives never cease to amaze me.
Childish and foolish is an understatement!
Must be the THC chemical factor, you THINK!
Keep trying to sale this voodoo science to the kids!
Pool people is all I can say!

LMAO!!!!

A lot of us who are reading your stuff are also laughing, APN, but at you, not with you.

PS to 2forE A moral dilemma for you! APN has made several “English” errors in this piece! Some severely impact on meaning! Are you gong to correct him as you did DPG? Or does the fact that he seems to adhere to the same mindless ideology that you do somehow give him “immunity”?

2forEnglish…. You made a lot of assumptions about my political views that are far from correct. I am not a Liberal Lefty Nor am I a Rightous righty… I stand firmly in the middle of the road, like you, and let common sense guided by science and faith guide the decisions I make. I do react to obvious key words…usually by by using words that WILL produce a heated response!! I do not look down on anyone nor do I hold any one HUMAN in any form as the undeniable purist that he or she may believe themselvs to be. I can and do get sarcastic when I feel that it is acceptable, my apologies if it was not in your case. RBT is my elder, I do not speak for him, he does not speak for me…..However, we do agree on many things. I get fiesty when I get challenged…. I stand my ground, I have always skipped the ‘kool aid’ but I render aid to those in need and put those into their place when they desparately need to be smacked down…. My spelling sometimes suffers because of severe arthrytis in my hands (it makes touch typing a challenge!!) And other times I deliberately mispell words just because I want to see who is paying attention!!! (EPIDOMY was one of those …the other two were ‘bad’ fingers…) As far as the IQ thing …That was a math test…. most did not decode the word problem correct, glad you finally did!

2forEnglish climbs up on a high horse of feigned indignation and attempts to put me and others in our place with smugness,and condescension. He goes on and on, but fails to use some of those tools that would make his arguments more convincing—-like better logic and analysis and contemplation of his perceptions before he speaks. Perhaps he has not visited PLD for long and hasn’t read my postings? All the more reason for him to tread lightly in my case. And I don’t see that he has made much of a case with DPG either. Perhaps 2forE hasn’t noticed that anyone who is not a flaming right winger is pretty much called every name under the sun by those who are when they make their very first comment and forever after. Makes it hard not to respond in kind. That name calling and instant politicization is really the refuge of the weak (and 2forE is doing it too, even though he claims to be a middler”).

He has carefully constructed a little house of cards for me and DPG to live in, not realizing that he is reflecting his own inadequacies rather than ours. Just to return us to a state of reality, I have never:

*claimed to KNOW IT ALL
*generalized and categorized ALL of “those” people as absolute “right wingers”
(Just the ones who mindlessly parrot bad science because they ARE right wingers”)
*asserted that my OPINION is FACT, based on political affiliation….only on the science
*dismissed another’s views while declaring that person’s intellectual capacity is automatically below mine because he is not a liberal
(I dismiss them only when they prove themselves to be willfully ignorant)
*boasted of my own superiority – whether it be intellectual or physical superiority
(I have stated some facts about my background because it was demanded by others—just because I may be smarter than them doesn’t mean I’m boasting)

We finally get to the truth with “I am not a “right winger” – nor am I a “left winger”, but if I had to be locked in a room with an individual from either side at some point in the future. I know which one I would wish a massive heart attack on. I consider the liberals of today to be lazy and savage beasts who make the animals shine brightly as highly reasonable, logical and socially gracious beings!”

The truth is that 2forE is either a liar about his “politics” or doesn’t understand the irrationality he displays when he says “I am neither right nor left” and then wishes HEART ATTACKS on liberals.

More irrationality is in evidence when he than segues into “I have a deeply misanthropic nature and the obnoxiousness that both of you adhere to while attempting to make others consider your way of thinking – simply refreshes my hatred of humans and reminds me of why I feel this much contempt in the first place”

Hate humans? Deeply misanthropic? Obnoxiousness?.(like wishing heart attacks on people?) Sounds like you are projecting a lot of self-hatred there, 2forE. Have you sought help?

David Paul Gurtner has responded to 2forE also—-it was a bit hard to see who 2forE was painting exactly where with his “paintbrush of hate”, so we both responded. To add:

DPG states, “RBT is my elder, I do not speak for him, he does not speak for me…..However, we do agree on many things”. All true, and I hope DPG has not found anything I said in the previous comment to be “speaking for him”. We “elders” do like to share the wisdom of our years, though, and I am sure DPG will forgive me and let me know if I misspoke.

Since we’re talking about political views and how you mistakenly assume things, 2forE, (you middle of the road person who is not by any objective measure in the middle of any political road), let me remind you that what I am is NOT a liberal but a “progressive moderate conservative” who might have voted for McCain if he hadn’t done the Palin thing. I believe in science and rational analysis of facts, and do not suffer fools gladly. I let most abuse roll off my back, but am not going to sit still for abuse from people who abuse me and the truth while they show a complete lack of understanding of science and the nature of rational argument.

Yo RBT,
“I am is NOT a liberal but a “progressive moderate conservative” who might have voted for McCain if he hadn’t done the Palin thing”

I would have vote for McCain as well-WTF did he pick that bimbo for a running mate?

devil#Bob asks regarding McCain and Palin

“WTF did he pick that bimbo for a running mate?”

Because he’s a dumb Repugnant who thinks that THE BASE is going to win elections for him.

Romney did the same with Ryan. Mindless and self-deluded.

I thought it was a CNN “news babe” that did it. I did reference what Fox did with solar energy and Germany somewhere else on this thread or another. The difference is that the CNN news babe was just ignorant by accident, the Faux folks were doing their usual thing of deliberately misleading and misinforming.

Actually, the link I followed indicated it was a CNN news person not fox.

So maybe it would have been alright if say ‘W’ or his daddy got the NPP????

Hi Sc,
It is all about the money. The people you mentioned stand to make a fortune

Anyone who uses “Obummer” in place of the President’s actual name has NO right to be talking about “mental giants” to anyone.

Well RBT, I guess it sounds better than Hussein, correct?

Let’s see your FACTS Eddiedumbo! I’ve lived in the same geographical location all my life. The median temperature in the 50′s was 62 degrees. The current median temp for the same geographical location is 62 degrees…..SHAZAAMMMM!!!!!!!!!

EXPLAIN IT Eddie, if the entire planet is suffering from Goofy Gores “Jobal Warming” then how is it that the median temp for my location on the SAME planet is the same now as it was over a 1/2 century ago! Or do I just not understand “progressive” math and science?

You may be this DUMB but don’t expect someone with an IQ greater than a 100 to believe this politically motivated JUNK SCIENCE!

Global weather data collected to date: 100 years MAX!!!!! More like a couple of decades at best! And it was corrupted by Scientists trying to satisfy a PROGRESSIVE political agenda and done at the expense of the AMERICAN people!

Same science says the planet is 4.5 billion years aged

Time slice of data to analyze: x = 100 years of data / 4.5 BILLION YEARS
x = 0.000000022%

Now folks, just take this all in, our progressive scientists that claim that planet earth is 4.5 BILLIONS years aged can now predict CLIMATE CHANGE with less than 100 years of data or better put, a time slice of data that equates to 0.000000022%. BRILLIANT!!!
I wonder if these same scientists ever studied the concepts of an anomaly?

LMAO!!!!!!

I would think we should be more concerned with an ELE like a large object falling from outer space hitting the planet at about 33 thousand MPH! Or perhaps the Pacific ring of fire becoming active!!!!

Dumb or Dumber??? Which is it!!!!

Dumb or Dumber??? Which is it!!!!

What’s dumb is someone who has superior knowledge in one field, computer science for instance, believing that they also have superior knowledge in fields they know less about, like climate change and anthropogenic global warming (AGW) for instance.

What’s dumber is getting all puffed up and crowing about it like some demented rooster.

Let see your “facts” RBT! You and your progressive crowd have been spewing this crap for decades now. Put up or SHUT UP!

You seem to assert your superior knowledge of this planetary phenomenon called jobal warming, so, let’s see it! Lay it our for us ALL OMNISCIENT one.

Maybe you can also provide us with a progressive mediator so we can be certain to apply political correctness while sifting through your “scientific facts”.

APN

APN is losing it, folks. He is getting rather frantic with his comments.

“Let see your “facts” RBT! You and your progressive crowd have been spewing this crap for decades now. Put up or SHUT UP!…..let’s see it! Lay it our for us ALL”

APN apparently doesn’t read my comments or he would have noticed that I have been “showing facts” and “laying it out” in my comments to him, to rendar, and Frank Kahn, among others on this thread, and have done so countless times on others. Did he not notice that I pointed out the FACT that he was DEAD WRONG in what he said about the global impact of St. Helens? Have I not pointed out the FACT that he has made other errors?

No, I’m afraid that APN is just too blinded by confirmation bias and motivated reasoning to ever believe the truth about AGW. He is fearful of truth and rational thinking, as are many conservatives, and will stubbornly cling to what he WANTS to believe, no matter how wrong and delusional that may be.

Go to the Skeptical Science website, APN. Assuming you have the intelligence and science background to understand what you read there, you will find truth. You really have to do the work yourself if you wish to overcome your ignorance, but If you don’t understand what you read, ask those of us who DO understand for clarification.

RBT, alias “the Great I AM” said: but If you don’t understand what you read, ask those of us who DO understand for clarification.

I read your tripe my friend although it was very painful and a total waste of my time. Same BS that you PC marxist idiots have been spewing for decades now.

Obviously you don’t understand what YOU read and you sure as heck don’t understand “Science”. REAL science that is!

Face it, the GIG is up and all of us THINKING people understand the motivating principles behind the largest SCAM that has ever been perpetrated on the AMERICAN people by you sick progs who assert yourself as some form of superior intellect. i.e. “self-appointed gods of the planet”

I’m sure in decades from now what YOUR politically motivated JUNK SCIENCE is stating as FACTS will be just about as correct as what those great scientific minds were spewing in the early 70′s. Remember????? Ice age by 2000!!! Planet earth was in a major cooling trend!!!!

Now, what happened to YOUR science?!?!? It seems your “Science” from the 70′s wasn’t very accurate, was it? Or perhaps we simpletons have missed something here!

Fact is my simple EARTH minded friend, you nor any other human being on this planet has a CLUE what tomorrow will bring, GOD does, but you don’t and never will. BUT, I’m sure we will have some progressive “Scientific” answer as to why you once again missed the BOAT!

People like you are a major curiosity to me. YOU assert yourself as something superior to GOD who created this planet. As if, your “Science” is superior to the CREATOR. Now that is arrogant stupidity, you think!

Do you believe in GOD? If not, I find it curious that a man who does not believe in GOD would be so consumed with a planet that is 4.5 BILLION YEARS AGED when the average life span is approximately 73 years.

Time slice of your life: 73 years / 4.5 Billion

Your life as a time slice of the planet: 0.000000016%

You better get busy my friend, it appears you are just a BLIP on the planetary scale. Bottom line, insignificant and absolutely MEANINGLESS, given your earthly mindset.

What happens to you when you perish? Nothing? Do the worms eat you and that’s it? If so, then please explain to us simpletons why you are so consumed with “Climate change” and the FREE activities of your fellow man?

No need to respond to that question because we all understand. It is about POWER AND GREED over the world and this sick mindset it is as old as mankind. The world has witnessed your kind numerous times throughout history and the results are always the same…….Misery, long suffering and then Death and Destruction for those who do not dance to your VOODOO science. i.e.; Hitler, Stalin, Sadaam Hussien ,etc etc etc

We get it pal, this is YOUR WORLD, not ours, and we shall all be required to behave JUST LIKE YOU SEE FIT!!! Maybe you can fly over us on Al Gores Gulfstream and then look down upon us, as your “Subjects”.

Sick Pup!

APN: I’m not concerned about something like a meteor that I have no control over. Now head to your bunker and hide . Hope its deep enough!

APN has now totally lost it and gone off into irrationality land. I don’t fell very bad for him because he was warned not to mess with the bull of truth because he would then feel the horns of logic and rationality. He obviously doesn’t like the horns and is thrashing mightily in front of all.

Or maybe it’s that other thing. He is one of the “Vampires of Mindless Adherence to Failed Ideology”, and I have splashed the Holy Water of Truth on him. Now he screams and smokes, and writhes and melts before our eyes—-just like in the movies. Has anyone got a stake? We need to put him out of his misery.

Sick Pup, indeed!

Eddiedumbo said APN: I’m not concerned about something like a meteor that I have no control over. Now head to your bunker and hide . Hope its deep enough!

Eddie my friend, you don’t have control over anything on this planet. Never have and never will. I bet that comment eludes you now doesn’t it.

The all OMNISCIENT RBT said: “Or maybe it’s that other thing. He is one of the “Vampires of Mindless Adherence to Failed Ideology”, and I have splashed the Holy Water of Truth on him. Now he screams and smokes, and writhes and melts before our eyes—-just like in the movies. Has anyone got a stake? We need to put him out of his misery. ”

The only failed ideology is the progressive movement which is destroying our way of life given to us by GOD and not by evil men like yourself.

Now , with that said, why don’t you climb up on your Myan temple and dance to the gods of the planet of the apes. In doing so, just maybe you can get them to buy this VOODOO science you’re trying to sell us. In fact, you and Goofy Gore must be a throwback to the ole Myan Cult!

Let’s see now, ole RBT and Gore standing on high at the top of the temple waiting on a total eclipse of the sun. As it happens, RBT looks at Goofy Gore to get his queue and then speaks in tongue to the masses below(Dumb Subjects). Then, after a few seconds, and with the crowd in complete FEAR, the sun magically re-appears and ALL IS WELL due to the super-natural powers of the progressive god-Kings!!!!

Got any VOODOO magic tricks for us today, RBT???

LMAO!

Foolish people!

APN says, “Foolish people!’

Too bad that he doesn’t recognize the he is one of the most “foolish” to ever appear on PLD, certainly since the days of DaveH. WAIT! Could it be? Is APN really DaveH? A distinct possibility—–any mention of von mises will prove the point.

RBT said” Too bad that he doesn’t recognize the he”

You been hitting those booze again RBT? You said you were a teacher? Now, which is it, teacher or a GW Scientist?

Have you ever considered therapy?

APN

APN says, in his getting-to-be-all-too-typical mindless fashion, “All I can say is, EXCELLENT POST!!!!! However, don’t expect a progressive to understand what you just said” .

APN IS, for a change, 100% correct, because this “progressive moderate conservative” certainly doesn’t understand it. Not because of any failing of my reasoning abilities, you understand, but because “what DaveB just said” is so wrong in so many ways.

DaveB misinterprets and misinforms with “Gullible warming is a thing of the past. It lost its place to “climate change.” This should be considered a true concern…it changes daily”.
“Climate change” has always been with us, “man caused global warming” is the new kid on the block.

The same with “Since the eruptions of volcanoes in since Mt. Saint Helens blew, volcanoes have dumped more gasses, pollutants (dust and the like) into the atmosphere than mankind has done since the beginning of mankind” Simply NOT true by a substantial margin.

“…or, if you are on the evolutionary side, than all your early ancestors combined from the amoeba on” This is true in the sense that we DO know that volcanoes HAVE released a lot of materials into the atmosphere over billions of years. Of course, it IS a bit misleading to imply that the amoeba is an early ancestor, but that’s a minor point.

“Sitting children within three feet of lights exposes them to high amounts mercury.”
Simply NOT true.
“Not only is mercury leaked onto surfaces but the gasses permeate the air”
That is only true IF the lamps are broken and yes, mercury is a hazardous substance that needs to be cleaned up properly. Of course, we shouldn’t forget that the biggest mercury problem exists downwind of coal-fired power plants and downstream from the industries that have dumped chemical wastes into our waterways.

And this is just plain silly. “Let’s get real -limit the Big O’s time in the air and the number of speeches he gives fundraising and bloviating. Think of the effects on the environment!”

Dave, as well documented, RBT should change his call sign to RBF. “Right Brain Feeler”

Not sure what his/her point is but it sure took a lot of space and gas to get it out.

WHEW!

APN again feels the need to say something when he has nothing to say and regales us with, “Not sure what his/her point is but it sure took a lot of space and gas to get it out. WHEW!”

Why does he persist in making himself look so foolish? He is “not sure what my point is”? My point was to clear up some bad information. That’s not obvious? And why the “his/her”? Has APN paid so little attention to anything I say that he doesn’t know I’m a 72-yeart-old male?

MIndlessness mindlessly repeated is the epitome of mindlessness. APN is close to reaching the top.

RBT said : I’m a 72-yeart-old male

_________________________________________________________________

Let me get this right, you are 72 years aged!!??!!

I find it very difficult to believe that a man aged 72 years could be foolish enough to buy into this GW scam. I smell a skunk here! I bet MONEY, GREED and POWER may be a factor here.

Let’s analyze:

Now, at 72 years aged that means you have reached the average life span for we males. Could you explain to us why you are so consumed over trying to control the lifestyles of 6-7 Billion people on a raging planet 4.5 Billion years aged?

I bet you’re concerned about future generations, correct? Leaving them a legacy as one of the few and the proud “gods of the planet”. You think you may get re-incarnated or resurrected maybe as the ALL OMNIPOTENT ONE?

Going back through your comments makes me think you’re more like 27 years aged. I say that because you assert an ego similar to a male having just reached puberty. Now, did you transpose the numbers? If not, given I have an IQ at 168, I would bet you probably have some SKIN in the game, as in, some GREEN ENERGY stocks or maybe a share or two in goofy gores GW businesses?

I bet you stand to roll in MILLIONS upon MILLIONS when the commie-progs finally get a CC bill through congress, correct? AND, in addition to your MILLIONS, you can enjoy GOD’s planet all by yourself while the rest of us sit home trying to figure out how to pay for our next “Green Energy” bill.

We peasants will be “Subject to” the next increase in our Carbon Emissions Tax by decree through YOU and the “gods of the planet”. We sure can’t have we commoners doing anything but working to SAVE the planet, for YOU and the elite minded, correct?

Heck, we just need to leave the friendly skies, beaches and mountains to those of YOU who are self-appointed as our planet-god-kings, great saviors of all mankind. EVO THE CREATOR! Let us all bend a knee in the presence of the GREAT RBT alias EVO the planet savior.

Well, Mr. PHD in “Jobal” Warming, which is it?? How much money do you have at risk in this foolish scheme? How many MILLIONS will you make at the expense of OUR FREEDOMS??? Do you plan on re-distributing your wealth among us peasants?

PS: By the way, maybe you should check your English and spelling before you critic others or is that just another noble trait of the progressive elite mindset with the IQ of an ameba? i.e; Al Gore do as I say not as I do!

Bottom line, sick people and as lost as two rats turds in a bushel of wheat!

APN….. You truely are a piece of work… I bet that David Koch is your best bud!!!… So where do you, David and God have coffee together…?? I’m sure it’s paradise….always sunshine, sweet smells of exotic flowers everwhere…. angelic voices wafting through the air…. I wonder.. are there rainbows and unicorns too???…. Just because you were gullible at one point in time and let me guess, it was someone just like us or so you thought!!! You sing the praises of your beloved Koch Bro’s from way up high… Loftiness… Yes sir you glow in it…. You of all people have the inside scoop on all of us Progressive, intellectual, scientificly minded, future looking, peaceniks…. That you assume want nothing more than to make a killing in the markets, off the backs of the working poor, with Carbon Cap and Trade… Yep that’s we want…NOT!!!! Too bad you have to be such a jerk and lay blame about the things you know not..!!!!…. You make grandstanding look like the chicken dance… speaking of that… you ready to put that fancy Rooster suit back on and parade for YOUR following??? Thought so!!!…. Have at!!! When lightning strikes or you have an epiphany and fall from grace let us know… we will be here ready to assist you and anyone else brave enough to investigate FACTS and SCIENCE..!! In the neantime enjoy your private little tirad. If all you listen to is politics and religiosity then all you will spew is more the same…. Just so everyone else knows I have nothing against God… Just donkyholes that look down on the rest of the Kingdom believing it their job to save the masses….

Frank Kahn is hiding from us today, apparently because he hasn’t done his homework. But never fear, APN is stepping up to play Whack-a-Mole in his place. I will oblige him, since he seems to enjoy getting his brains beaten in on the topic of AGW as much as Frank does. I will insert comments amongst his to point out his logic fails, irrational thinking, political bias, and lack of scientific knowledge as appropriate. I will put **** in front of my comments so that you can pick them out.

Let’s analyze:
****If APN is going to do some real “analysis” here, it will be the first time that he has demonstrated that capability. I wish him success.

Now, at 72 years aged that means you have reached the average life span for we males.
****WRONG The average life expectancy at birth for U.S. males is 75. Since I’ve reached 72, my “new” life expectancy is now 84, and if I reach 84, I will be expected to live until 90. Sloppy thinking, APN.

Could you explain to us why you are so consumed over trying to control the lifestyles of 6-7 Billion people on a raging planet 4.5 Billion years aged?
****WRONG several times over. “Consumed” is a biased opinion, I am not trying to “control” anyone’s “lifestyles”, and the age of the planet is irrelevant. All this is just parroting of the wing nut talking points.

I bet you’re concerned about future generations, correct? Leaving them a legacy as one of the few and the proud “gods of the planet”. You think you may get re-incarnated or resurrected maybe as the ALL OMNIPOTENT ONE?
****WRONG Just more wing nut rhetoric. I do think that man in his hubris is destroying the planet and have been fighting that for 40+ years. I do not believe in resurrection or reincarnation, either—-when it’s over, it’s over.

Going back through your comments makes me think you’re more like 27 years aged. I say that because you assert an ego similar to a male having just reached puberty. Now, did you transpose the numbers? If not, given I have an IQ at 168, I would bet you probably have some SKIN in the game, as in, some GREEN ENERGY stocks or maybe a share or two in goofy gores GW businesses?
****WRONG again, and again on many counts. It’s mostly insults, and they prove nothing but the inability of the insulter to come up with real argument. APN does not display any signs of having an IQ of 168 (and perhaps not even above 100). He has forgotten that I spent 30 years in the education business and am far more conversant with what “smart” folk and “dullards” and everyone in between sound like. As the saying from that famous political debate goes, “I knew some 168 IQ folks, and you’re no 168″. I own NO stocks at all, beyond what my various pension funds may have invested in, and I neither know nor care what they may be. I worry only that they invest wisely and make money to pay me. The way the stock market has been corrupted and manipulated by the greedy rich, it is little more than a Ponzi game, and immoral to boot.

I bet you stand to roll in MILLIONS upon MILLIONS when the commie-progs finally get a CC bill through congress, correct? AND, in addition to your MILLIONS, you can enjoy GOD’s planet all by yourself while the rest of us sit home trying to figure out how to pay for our next “Green Energy” bill
****More rhetoric and parroting of wing nut talking points. And very WRONG since I own not a single stock. APN’s house of cards is falling over. .

We peasants will be “Subject to” the next increase in our Carbon Emissions Tax by decree through YOU and the “gods of the planet”. We sure can’t have we commoners doing anything but working to SAVE the planet, for YOU and the elite minded, correct?
****Rhetoric
Heck, we just need to leave the friendly skies, beaches and mountains to those of YOU who are self-appointed as our planet-god-kings, great saviors of all mankind. EVO THE CREATOR! Let us all bend a knee in the presence of the GREAT RBT alias EVO the planet savior.
****More rhetoric
Well, Mr. PHD in “Jobal” Warming, which is it?? How much money do you have at risk in this foolish scheme? How many MILLIONS will you make at the expense of OUR FREEDOMS??? Do you plan on re-distributing your wealth among us peasants?
****Even more rhetoric, and the house of cards that APN has constructed on his faulty premises is flat on the table.

PS: By the way, maybe you should check your English and spelling before you critic others or is that just another noble trait of the progressive elite mindset with the IQ of an ameba? i.e; Al Gore do as I say not as I do!
****WRONG APN is so eager to score a point, ANY point, that he fails to notice what he has done as he “critics” my “ameba”. Did I make a typo? Who knows and who cares? APN is apparently too uninformed to know that amoeba and ameba are BOTH accepted spellings of the name of the oozy little one-celled critter. But his “critic” is a rather egregious error—-it is neither an alternative spelling nor a plausible typo—-it is just APN mindlessly shooting off another toe . LOL .

Bottom line, sick people and as lost as two rats turds in a bushel of wheat!
****What? WHAT? This is the closing argument in this pile of horsepucky that APN has inflicted on us? It certainly isn’t as stirring as the last couple sentences of the
Gettysburg Address. But of course, mentioning the Gettysburg Address in a reply to APN’ mindless and angry ranting is an insult to the ghost of Lincoln. I apologize.

It was fun playing Whack-a-Mole with you, APN, although my “whacking” arm is quite tired. As said, if you ever want to get serious about AGW, I’m your man. If you’d rather mess with the bull and feel the horns, that’s OK with me too—-tighten up your chin strap for more whacks.. Sorry that you have suffered such a major fail in your attempts here to show us that you are capable of “analysis”—–I DO feel for you..

RBT……Gotcha…Bingo…. I knew it…..you are a progressive-socialist GOD HATING AMERICAN HATING school teacher…nothing more, nothing less.

How does it feel to live off we Americans who paid you to dumb down our kids?

Yp APN,
“Keep preaching the gospel of your man-made politically motivated science and suffer the consequences of your foolish beliefs”.

Really-That is best come back that you have?

Science is based of facts, like math, 2 + 2 always equals 4.

No APN…Science is not my God…. I am not an atheist either. Science is a tool… A tool that I and Hundreds of Millions of other Humans use every day!!! But NOT like the tool you are for the Right(ous) Wing Nuts that parade around pretending to blow the lid off ALL of the ‘progressive lies’ just because they don’t mesh with your limited understanding of the science involved and your misguided religious/political agendas. Most scientists use the Minds God gave them to seek out the FACTS of our physical world and to use their God given inspiration to find out how things work. Unlike you, scientists do not seek to be rid of the things they can’t understand. Scientists seek the truths of our existance to better understand our world and what it takes to keep it viable for all…. Climate change is a FACT APN not some myth that is being used to dominate you… you already have a myth dominating you…it’s called DENIAL…. Climate Change is as real as the day is long and we understand better than we did in the 70′s I suspect we will learn even more in the coming centuries should we last that long!! While we could argue about the merrits or evils of ‘global warming’, which you are ferrociously hung up on, it is not the issue anymore…. Human activities are modifing the world we live in and science is the ONLY tool that will expose the inner workings of these complex systems…. If you believe that there are those that hope to profit from it then there probably are… It’s not me… I’m not about that…. What you sir are doing is far worse…. you are throwing it all out because you don’t get it…. and your puppet master will scold you if you don’t! Pehaps you would feel better if you purchased a 5 or 10 gal can of your favorite petroleum product and the use it to saturate all of the evil things that science has provided to TEMPT you, Your computer, Your phone, Your TV, Your Radio, Your Car/truck/boat…pretty much everything that SCIENCE has brought to you before the EVIL it REPRESENTS brings you down. I’ll even loan you a match to light it all up.

Have not followed your postings with this person so not intending to get involved there. I am curious, though, about your opinion on global climate change.

I see many who seem to take extremist views on this subject. While there is no disputing the damage that we cause to the environment, it is also not appropriate to condemn us as the sole cause of all climate changes occurring.

While it would not be rational to demonize all the wonderful things that science has given us, it is true that most, if not all, of them have increased the human carbon foot print on the planet.

I would like to discuss your opinions if you want to have a rational discussion.

Frank… That’s why I originally decided to post here. But as you can see this board is mostly about posturing political self interest. But enough of that!!! Framework for discussion: IPCC has laid out the science for us all we need to do is follow the leader and stick to the facts for the basis, we can and should discuss the ramifications of the outcome of doing nothing, especially since 90% of scientists involved with the ‘climate change’ phenom agree that something is in fact happening, we can in fact measure it and we have in fact produced climate models that appear to be following the observed trends. Next on the agena… NO POLITICAL infused denial or calls for executing the deniers!!! That’s just more of the same speading of fecal matter and not conducive to a ‘discussion’ let alone a real debate. And now the tough part is it ‘anthropogenic caused or assisted’ climate change? This is the tough one and I expect only SCIENCE to discussed here… Fair enough? Would you care to add anything to the discussion framework? WTS, APN and RBT would you care to add anything? Would anyone else care to chime in within the guidelines posted here?

It sounds reasonable, I need some time to review some of the IPCC work and guidelines. My ISP has a problem with download speeds and it takes a while to download the documents.

I cannot agree with their assessments until I have a chance to assess their possible motivations. Never take an organizations word for something unless you know there is not possible bias. I think that is a reasonable precaution.

Frank…take what time you need….. The action is prudent… one should investigate any source of bias to determine if the bias was used to assign weight to the direction of the stated outcome, the determination of proposed goals or calls to action….

DPG said: “Climate Change is as real as the day is long and we understand better than we did in the 70′s I suspect we will learn even more in the coming centuries should we last that long!!”

I have no argument with you about climate change. Our climate has been in a state of continual change since GOD created it and will continue to be IN CHANGE until he decides the very moment to END IT. The earth cannot and will not be destroyed by mankind. I know you like to think we are that powerful but logic and commonsense says otherwise.

I do however respect the fact that you do freely and honestly acknowledge the FACT that SCIENCE missed the BOAT in the 70′s when predicting the earth was in a cooling phase and that the next ice age could occur as soon as the turn of the century. This is the CRAP SCIENCE I was taught in HS in the early 70′s. Fact is, YOU DON’T HAVE A CLUE!
Young folks are easy to FOOL but those of us who have lived on this planet for over a 1/2 century may just be a little too wise, you think?

Now, when you people begin to build a record of ACCURATE predictions then maybe you will get a consensus needed to “SAVE THE PLANET”. Please save me your argument that later will be too late! YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT, your science cannot prove that, and that is a FACT!

This whole subject is about MONEY/POWER/GREED and complete CONTROL over the masses so the elites can assert themselves as the imaginary “gods of the planet” they perceive themselves to be. It is a MAJOR part of the progressive PC movement that is destroying our Nation and our individual FREEDOMS.

Just think about WHO the key players ARE in this GW scam. Most of them are elite RICH politicians that fly over us in their Gulfstream Jets in route to their next vital GW Summit.

I was taught to THINK and to TRUST through VERIFICATION and the idea that some “Elite” can tell me to do as they say but not as they do is UNAMERICAN and belongs more so in a BANANA republic. So, let’s see MR. Gore, The King of GW, turn in his Jets, Mansions, Gas Guzzling RV’s, etc etc etc and then we can talk about “Saving the Planet” from we humans.

APN

DPG says, “And now the tough part is it ‘anthropogenic caused or assisted’ climate change? This is the tough one. Would anyone else care to chime in?”

Yes, DPG, I will definitely “chime in”. It is certainly going to be a VERY “tough one” to discuss if people are allowed to make up their own names for scientific phenomenon rather than use the ones that ALL the climate scientists use—-ALL scientists, even the deniers, would reject Frank’s terminology. Frank is particularly fond of stringing facts together in ways that that make no scientific sense and coming up with concepts and names that are just OPINIONS because the facts don’t support them. We need to agree on some basic FACTS right from the start in order to avoid confusion

FACT—-CLIMATE CHANGE has been occurring on Earth since the planet acquired oceans and an atmosphere many millions of years ago. It is cyclic and influenced by many things, including the sun and the path the earth follows in its orbit. It would be occurring even if there were NO humans on the planet and will continue even if we become extinct (provided an atmosphere remains).

FACT—-It is NOT proper to refer to “anthropegenic CAUSED” or “ASSISTED” CLIMATE CHANGE. What we are worried about right now is properly called ANTHROPOGENIC (or “man caused”) GLOBAL WARMING (AGW), which is only one factor that contributes to climate change, (along with all those ongoing cyclic influences that have been around for many millions of years)
.
FACT—-AGW is a recent phenomenon, since man’s activities did not seem to affect the climate much until the massive use of fossil fuels began at the onset of the industrial age..

FACT—-Man cannot control climate change, he can only seek to understand it. Man can only control his activities that contribute to climate change, such as the increasingly worrisome effects we see resulting from AGW.

Frank Kahn says: “I cannot agree with their assessments until I have a chance to assess their possible motivations. Never take an organizations word for something unless you know there is not possible bias”, and DPG replies, “Frank…take what time you need….. The action is prudent… one should investigate any source of bias to determine if the bias was used to assign weight to the direction of the stated outcome, the determination of proposed goals or calls to action”.

Our little exercise in “science exploration” is not off to a good start if Frank is talking about “possible motivations and bias”, rather than the science FACTS involved. And DPG is only pandering to Frank in what he has said. I have said it many times, Frank, I and others will talk to you about the science of AGW, provided that YOUR motivation is to really understand it rather than display the bias you have in the past..

NO, RBT, you will only discuss facts if I turn into a boot licker to your insane positing. You almost had it right, then you slid of the sanity wagon when you decided to go back the the incorrect position of AGW. There is no such thing, it is AAGW.

Frank Kahn is back, making feeble little sounds. He insists on pursuing his own very recent, very wrong, and very made up (by him) term of AAGW rather than acknowledge the truth of all the SCIENCE I just laid out for him.. Frank is always saying I don’t do that—–that I don’t cite specific scientific “facts”, that is. Why is Frank so self-deluded that he can’t recognize the “science” that is served up on a platter for him?

And who’s “insane” here, Frank? One definition of insanity is “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. By that definition, YOU are quite insane, since you seem to think that saying stupid, illogical, and downright untrue things over and over will somehow make them intelligent, logical, and true. I, on the other hand, keep saying the same things over and over to you, but I DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT, expect anything to change—-I know you will continue to respond with mindlessness, stupidity, ignorance, churlishness, illogic, confirmation bias, irrationality, and a total lack of respect for any kind of “truth”, scientific or otherwise. That makes me perfectly sane in comparison to you, Frank.

There is no such thing as AAGW, Frank, except in the fevered and self-deluded recesses of your brain. GW is anthropogenic, period—-the word anthropogenic means “caused by man’s presence and/or activities”—-no “assisted” need be added because the GW we are talking about is due to man’s activities. Does the word “redundant” exist in your vocabulary, Frank? It is a fine word—-it describes both your use of “assisted” here and the basic condition of your existence on the planet. Or are you going to deny that and make up some more new words for us rather than use the English ones that MOST of us understand even if you dont (sic)?

once again the mindless and pervasively self deluded WHATEVER HIS / HER NAME IS, has failed to recognize his own lack of scientific facts.

here we go again, and if anyone is paying attention, you will notice he again failed to respond to any comment made by me.

IT SAID

“Frank Kahn is back, making feeble little sounds. He insists on pursuing his own very recent, very wrong, and very made up (by him) term of AAGW rather than acknowledge the truth of all the SCIENCE I just laid out for him.. Frank is always saying I don’t do that—–that I don’t cite specific scientific “facts”, that is. Why is Frank so self-deluded that he can’t recognize the “science” that is served up on a platter for him?”

AAGW is an acronym not a phrase or term. All acronyms are made up, even your favorite AGW is a made up acronym. Since you keep touting GALT’S postings, why don’t you berate him for his acronym ALF, he claims, and is proud of having made that one up?

Here there are vast numbers of ad hominems. He continues to think that calling names will somehow elevate himself to some glorious heights of righteousness. Now I must start using his sorry words in order to accurately describe his response. RBT (try giving a real name) has, for some reason, convinced himself that pounding his chest and calling names is science. Just a hint moron, saying, to read skeptical science sites, is not giving scientific facts. You don’t even remember the feeble attempt that you recently made towards acknowledging the second A in AAGW. YOU ADMITTED THAT CLIMATE CHANGE I.E. GLOBAL COOLING AND WARMING, IS CAUSED BY MANY THINGS AND HAS BEEN HAPPENING SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE EARTHS EXISTENCE. You correctly identified two sources for this change, sun activity and orbital changes. What you always fail in is recognizing the meaning of assisted. Considering that the global temperature is affected by many things, including the recent increase in sun spot activity, humans contribution is, by definition, a contributing factor, not a cause. To, first state, then dismiss additional causes is delusional. To think that you have stated actual scientific facts, as opposed to an opinion based on someone else’s opinion is delusional. To say empirically that AGW if a fact is delusional. GW is a fact, A is an opinion, no matter how well formulated and researched. To scientifically prove AGW is impossible, it can be modeled on computers and hypothesized but not proven. To scientifically prove it you would need to remove all other contributing factors first, then conduct a long term controlled experiment with a control group (how, another planet?), maybe isolating half the worlds atmosphere for non human contamination and the other half with current rates of contamination. It is a proven FACT that Mars is undergoing GW at this point in time. It is hypothesized that this is due to the increased sun spot activity. Now, while it is just a hypothesis, it is more than a small coincidence that Mars (no human made greenhouse gasses there) is experiencing GW at the same time as Earth. Would you try to claim AGW for Mars? Since there is no other discernible cause for the Mars GW other than the Sun, it is reasonable to assume that we are also affected by the same solar influences. Does this method of reasoning cause you to have an apoplectic fit?

“And who’s “insane” here, Frank? One definition of insanity is “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. By that definition, YOU are quite insane, since you seem to think that saying stupid, illogical, and downright untrue things over and over will somehow make them intelligent, logical, and true. I, on the other hand, keep saying the same things over and over to you, but I DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT, expect anything to change—-I know you will continue to respond with mindlessness, stupidity, ignorance, churlishness, illogic(sic), confirmation bias, irrationality, and a total lack of respect for any kind of “truth”, scientific or otherwise. That makes me perfectly sane in comparison to you, Frank”.
‘
Another large group of unsupportable ad hominem attacks. The ad hominem attacks are supposedly supported by attempts to ridicule by bald assertions. Name calling does nothing to change the truth about what is being said. I cannot comment on your logic because you have never said anything that was even put forth as a logical train of thought. Down right untrue is your opinion. Lets get down to the insanity idea. Yes, Einstein said that particular definition, it does however need qualification. I am basically arguing the fallacy of you claims of having given scientific facts. The necessity of repeating my argument is fostered by your incessant insistence of a lie. Which, brings us to how you fit the definition of insane. You adamantly insist that AGW is a fact, and refuse to hear and entertain any suggestion to the contrary. Since, you keep saying the same thing over and over and over in an attempt to make it a hard scientific fact is insane, by your definition. Your final tirade, using a large group of synonyms is not only an ad hominem attack, but also another example of a psychological dysfunction I addressed in my last comment.

“There is no such thing as AAGW, Frank, except in the fevered and self-deluded recesses of your brain. GW is anthropogenic, period—-the word anthropogenic means “caused by man’s presence and/or activities”—-no “assisted” need be added because the GW we are talking about is due to man’s activities. Does the word “redundant” exist in your vocabulary, Frank? It is a fine word—-it describes both your use of “assisted” here and the basic condition of your existence on the planet. Or are you going to deny that and make up some more new words for us rather than use the English ones that MOST of us understand even if you dont (sic)?”

Fevered and self-deluded? I have already explained why the second A is correct. I do not expect or desire that you use the correct term. GW is anthropogenic, is another insane attempt to make what you say the truth by repetition. Unlike you, I am not ignorant, I understand the word anthropogenic, and also anthropomorphize. One means to be cause by and the other means to give human traits to non human objects. If there were no other contributing factors at this time your statement would be correct. And, I did not say that there has to be other causes, I said there are. Again, I understand the word redundant quite well and see where you don’t really. The word Anthropomorphic does not include or imply assistance, so adding the word assisted is not redundant. Adding the word assisted simply allows for the fact that there are other causes besides man made ones. On a final note, please enlighten me as to what word you are referring, which I made up? With the exception of using Italian (correctly) I have not used any words not found in the English language. If you are saying that you don’t understand the English words I am using, please specify which ones so I can provide you with a Webster’s dictionary definition. TWEEN is in that dictionary as well as all the others I checked.

I don’t expect anyone to join this discussion, simply because, by now, they know that you will never ever realize the reality of your diatribes. They already know that I have used a great deal of restraint from lowering myself to the same level of name calling and character assassination used by you. They have also probably realized that my rational use of logic has not changed your vitriolic responses.

Frank Kahn is back, still making feeble little sounds and mindlessly defending his indefensible made up term—–AAGW

Since Frank has rejected looking at it because GALT and I have said it is perhaps the best single reference source, he refuses to look at the website Skeptical Science, and therefore doesn’t realize that it is so named because it is skeptical of the AGW deniers and skeptics. It’s kind of like not reading a book because you can tell from its title that it’s biased.

Everything Frank says between “Just a hint moron” and “Does this method of reasoning cause you to have an apoplectic fit”? actually saddens me greatly. A human mind is a terrible thing to waste, and Frank is wasting his and ours with this stuff.

Frank tries to pin the “insanity” thing on me. OK, Frank, I’m insane, just like the 97+ % of climate scientists who believe AGW is occurring. But you’re not because you refuse to believe something you can’t even properly name or define, and you don’t even understand the science supporting or against the idea. Yep, that’s sanity!.

This bears repeating, if for no reason than that Frank will come up with some rebuttal that will be fun to read.
“There is no such thing as AAGW, Frank, except in the fevered and self-deluded recesses of your brain. GW is anthropogenic, period—-the word anthropogenic means “caused by man’s presence and/or activities”—–no “assisted” need be added because the GW we are talking about is due to man’s activities”.

Frank asks, “On a final note, please enlighten me as to what word you are referring, which I made up?” AAGW, Frank, foremost among many others, but that’s the one I’m trying to stay on topic with while you meander in the fields of mindlessness..

I don’t expect anyone to join this discussion either, Frank, because the thread is dying as most do after a few days. You have probably driven many off with your rantings as well. Or perhaps they are embarrassed for you, Frank, as I am, and don’t want to watch your self-immolation in the fires of mindlessness and ignorance.

round 37 of RBT discusses his personal godhood.

Dense is not good enough for you.

“Frank Kahn is back, still making feeble little sounds and mindlessly defending his indefensible made up term—–AAGW”

LISTEN YOU PATHETIC MORONIC INSANE PUKE, AAGW IS AN ACRONYM NOT A TERM. I DON’T HAVE TO DEFEND IT BECAUSE IT IS SELF EXPLANATORY TO ANYONE WITH AN IQ ABOVE 10. FEEBLE IS WHAT YOU FEEL WHEN YOU TRY TO GET OUT OF BED UNASSISTED IN THE MORNING. MINDLESS IS YOU CROWING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS WRONG AND ONLY EXISTS INSIDE YOUR DEMENTED MIND.

“Since Frank has rejected looking at it because GALT and I have said it is perhaps the best single reference source, he refuses to look at the website Skeptical Science, and therefore doesn’t realize that it is so named because it is skeptical of the AGW deniers and skeptics. It’s kind of like not reading a book because you can tell from its title that it’s biased.”

YOU LYING PIECE OF WHALE $HIT, YOU KNOW DAMN WELL I NEVER SAID I REFUSE TO LOOK AT YOUR WORTHLESS SITE. AND, WHY DO YOU INSIST ON DRAGGING GALTS NAME INTO THIS? HAS HE SECRETLY MESSAGED YOU THAT HE AGREES WITH YOUR DRIVEL? I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH YOUR IDEA THOUGH. AFTER OUR LONG INTERACTION I HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE INVERSELY ACCEPTED. IF YOU SAY IT IS “THE BEST SINGLE REFERENCE SOURCE”, THEN IT IS PROBABLY THE WORST SOURCE. ACTUALLY, THE SKEPTICAL SCIENCE TERM ORIGINATED IN A PERIODICAL, IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PURPOSE OF THAT SITE AND, UNLESS WITHIN THE LAST MONTH, IT NEVER MENTIONED DEBUNKING OF AGW DENIERS. ITS FOCUS WAS ON BEING SKEPTICAL (CRITICAL) OF CLAIMED SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION, YOU KNOW LIKE BEING SKEPTICAL ABOUT THE HYPED UP CLAIMS THAT GW IS ALL CAUSED BY MAN MADE GREENHOUSE GASSES. IT IS PUBLISHED BY THE SKEPTICS SOCIETY AND HERE IS A DESCRIPTION OF ITS INTENT AND PURPOSE.

“Skeptic is a quarterly science education and science advocacy magazine published internationally by The Skeptics Society, a nonprofit organization devoted to promoting scientific skepticism and resisting the spread of pseudoscience, superstition, and irrational beliefs. Founded by Michael Shermer, founder of the Skeptics Society, the magazine was first published in the spring of 1992 and is published through Millennium Press.”

“Everything Frank says between “Just a hint moron” and “Does this method of reasoning cause you to have an apoplectic fit”? actually saddens me greatly. A human mind is a terrible thing to waste, and Frank is wasting his and ours with this stuff.”

I FIGURED YOU WOULD BE INCAPABLE OF FOLLOWING AND UNDERSTANDING NORMAL SCIENCE AND LOGICAL DEDUCTION. I HOPE YOU GET SO SAD ABOUT YOUR INABILITY TO COMPREHEND TRUE LOGIC THAT YOU FALL INTO A DEEP DEPRESSION FROM WHICH THERE IS NO RECOVERY. SUCH IS THE BEST WAY TO REMOVE YOUR INSANITY FROM PUBLIC AIRING.

“Frank tries to pin the “insanity” thing on me. OK, Frank, I’m insane, just like the 97+ % of climate scientists who believe AGW is occurring. But you’re not because you refuse to believe something you can’t even properly name or define, and you don’t even understand the science supporting or against the idea. Yep, that’s sanity!.”

FAULTY LOGIC REARS ITS UGLY HEAD (RBT). FIRST THE QUOTED PERCENTAGE OF SCIENTISTS IS EXAGGERATED. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT ONLY THE SCIENTISTS YOU APPROVE OF CAN BE COUNTED IN THE PERCENTAGE, BUT SORRY, RBT, YOU ARE NOT GOD, YOU ARE NOT A SCIENTIST AND YOU HAVE NO POWER OR AUTHORITY TO MAKE SUCH A DECISION. I DECIDED TO DO A SEARCH OF ARTICLES TO FIND THE SOURCE FOR YOUR 97+% STATEMENT. MAYBE I FOUND IT AND MAYBE NOT BUT HERE IS THE QUOTE.

“Two recent studies adopting different approaches have arrived at strikingly consistent results. A survey of over 3000 Earth scientists found that as the climate expertise increased, so did agreement about human-caused global warming. For climate scientists actively publishing climate research (79 scientists in total), there was 97% agreement.”

IF THIS IS YOUR SOURCE THEN THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH THE ASSERTION THAT 97% OF CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AGREE THAT THERE IS AGW. IT ONLY STATES THAT 97% OF THOSE WHO ARE ACTIVELY PUBLISHING AGREE. AND IT ACTUALLY GIVES A NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THE PERCENTAGE, 79 TOTAL. THAT WOULD APPEAR TO MEAN THAT 76 OUT OF 79 AGREE. NOW THE QUESTION IS, HOW MANY CLIMATE SCIENTISTS ARE THERE IN THE WORLD? IF THERE ARE ONLY 100, THEN THE ACTUAL PERCENTAGE OF AGREEMENT DROPS TO 76%. IF THERE ARE 5,000 WOULD YOU CONSIDER A SURVEY OF JUST 79 TO BE A SUFFICIENT SAMPLE FOR STATISTICAL MODELING?

JUST BECAUSE YOU OBJECT TO MY ADDING ASSISTED TO THE NAME DOES NOT MEAN I CAN’T PROPERLY NAME. AND YOU ARE EITHER DELUSIONAL, ILLITERATE OR SIMPLY LYING WHEN YOU SAY I CAN’T DEFINE WHAT I CALLED ANTHROPOMORPHIC ASSISTED GLOBAL WARMING. I DID, QUITE ADEQUATELY DEFINE AND EXPLAIN MY REASONING PREVIOUSLY.

“This bears repeating, if for no reason than that Frank will come up with some rebuttal that will be fun to read.
“There is no such thing as AAGW, Frank, except in the fevered and self-deluded recesses of your brain. GW is anthropogenic, period—-the word anthropogenic means “caused by man’s presence and/or activities”—–no “assisted” need be added because the GW we are talking about is due to man’s activities”.”

ONCE AGAIN YOU SHOW SIGNS OF INSANITY BY REPEATING SOMETHING IN THE HOPES THAT IT WILL MAKE IT TRUE. BY YOUR STANDARDS OF SCIENTIFIC REASONING, I COULD SAY IT IS SGW AND BE JUST AS JUSTIFIED AS YOUR AGW. AND I WOULD BE JUST AS CORRECT AS YOU IF IS SIMPLY SAID NOT ONLY IS THERE NO AAGW BUT THERE ISN’T ANY AGW AND IN FACT GW IS A MYTH. BY YOUR REASONING, I CAN MAKE IT TRUE SIMPLY BY REPEATING IT OVER AND OVER FOR A FEW WEEKS.

“Frank asks, “On a final note, please enlighten me as to what word you are referring, which I made up?” AAGW, Frank, foremost among many others, but that’s the one I’m trying to stay on topic with while you meander in the fields of mindlessness..”

AAGW IS NOT A WORD OR A TERM, IT IS AN ACRONYM, HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO REPEAT THIS FACT BEFORE YOU COMPREHEND THE TRUTH. AND, YOUR PROOF BY BALD ASSERTION IS OVER THE BOUNDARY AND HAS FALLEN INTO THE CATEGORY OF A BALD FACED LIE. AAGW IS NOT A MADE UP WORD, SO WITHOUT THAT YOU HAVE EXACTLY 0 MADE UP WORDS. TWEEN IS ALSO A WORD THAT IS PRESENT IN THE DICTIONARY, SO, ALTHOUGH IT IS SILLY AND MADE UP, I DID NOT DO IT. MEANDERING IN THE FIELDS OF MINDLESSNESS? HERE YOU MIGHT BE CORRECT, I AM INDEED MEANDERING THROUGH YOUR FIELDS OF MINDLESSNESS IN AN ATTEMPT TO GUIDE YOU BACK TO REALITY.

“I don’t expect anyone to join this discussion either, Frank, because the thread is dying as most do after a few days. You have probably driven many off with your rantings as well. Or perhaps they are embarrassed for you, Frank, as I am, and don’t want to watch your self-immolation in the fires of mindlessness and ignorance.”

ONCE AGAIN YOU ABUSE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. RANTING IS WHAT YOU DO, I ATTEMPT TO KEEP MY POSTS CIVIL AND REASONABLE. YOU USE HYPERBOLE, PERSONAL ATTACKS, NAME CALLING AND RIDICULE TO AVOID MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION. ACTUALLY THEY ARE LAUGHING HYSTERICALLY AT THE HISTRIONICS DISPLAYED BY YOU IN YOUR FEEBLE AND INANE DEROGATORY RESPONSES. ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE USING PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTION WHEN YOU SAY IT IS ME THAT EMBARRASSES YOU, ACTUALLY YOU ARE EMBARRASSED BY YOUR OWN LACK OF KNOWLEDGE AND LOGIC. OF COURSE, I AM ONLY GUESSING AT YOUR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT ATTEMPTED TO GIVE ANY INDICATION OF REAL KNOWLEDGE.

LET ME TRY TO COBBLE TOGETHER YOUR FACTS, WHICH IN YOUR MIND PROVE YOU’RE RIGHT ABOUT AGW. YOU WERE A HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER. YOU TAUGHT PHYSICS AND BIOLOGY. YOU WERE AN ADMINISTRATOR OF A SCHOOL. YOU TOOK SOME COURSES IN COLLEGE. YOU CLAIM YOU STUDIED PSYCHOLOGY FAR BEYOND PSYCH 101. YOU STUDIED 20 SCIENCE (PHYSICS) RELATED SUBJECTS. YOU STUDIED GENETICS. YOU STUDIED ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE. I NEED TO GO AND BACK READ BECAUSE I DONT REMEMBER IF IT WAS JUST SOMEONE RESPONDING TO YOU OR ALSO YOU THAT SAID YOU HAVE BOTH A BA AND MASERS IN SCIENCE. WOULD THAT MASTERS BE A MA? IF YOU SAID YOU HAVE A BA IN SCIENCE, PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT DISCIPLINE IN SCIENCE AWARDS A BACHELOR OF ARTS DEGREE? NOW, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE, THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY STUDY THAT WOULD EVEN BEGIN TO MAKE YOU QUALIFIED TO STATE EMPIRICALLY THAT AGW EXISTS. OH, AND I HATE FIRE SO SETTING MYSELF ON FIRE IS NOT LIKELY.

Frank, APN, RBT…. If you guys could take a brake bitch slapping each other for a few minutes and read THIS perhaps it might enlighten the situation:
SOURCE
http://churchandstate.org.uk/2013/02/christian-fundamentalists-are-driving-our-country-into-the-dark-ages/

Christian fundamentalists are not to be confused with mainstream evangelical Christians. While Christian fundamentalists may be evangelical, not every evangelical Christian is necessarily a fundamentalist.

This mindless tolerance, which places observable scientific facts, subject to proof, on the same level as unprovable supernatural fantasy, has played a major role in the resurgence of both anti-intellectualism and anti-rationalism.

The symptoms of the infection of anti-intellectualism are as follows:

1. Erosion of education — escalating attacks on teachers as bad citizens, teachers’ unions as greedy “takers”, the evolution vs. creationism debate, resistance to stem cell research (or any kind of scientific research that conflicts with their Biblical worldview), fundamentalist emphasis on voucher system to create taxpayer funded fundamentalist schools, fear of a changing, increasingly pluralistic society (the current face of which is the extraordinary power fundamentalists give to the LGBT community as the force eroding American morality and bringing down the entire nation), and a negative economy which is generating public support by those who consider themselves members of the Religious Right by demonizing public education as a “liberal conspiracy” to take their children away from God.
2. Biblical Literalism: The Bible is the foundation of “truth,” from science to social interactions, and anything that disagrees with a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible is a product of Satanic manipulation, of which the by-product of Satan is secularism.
3. Oversimplification: The idea that there is a clear right and wrong (based on Biblical laws, or cherry-picked verses), the universe is either moral or immoral, and that so-called “assaults” on religious “freedom” of fundamentalists signify an invisible war between the forces of God (or “good”) and the forces of Satan (or “evil”).
4. Assertion of the patriarchal right to control women: To fundamentalists, women are second-class citizens, subject to a strict social hierarchy. This hierarchy can be observed in every stripe of fundamentalism, from Islamic fundamentalism to Christian fundamentalism and it goes like this:
God/Jesus is the head of the man
Man is the head of the woman, subject only to God
Woman is subjugated to a status which is wholly reliant on having “faith” that her husband will do the right thing because he is specially influenced by God by special decree of the Bible. Fundamentalist website after website counsels women that if her husband does wrong that the only thing she can do is pray that God will guide him to a different decision, that she is not to disagree with him publicly (or in front of children). She is free (sometimes) to give an opinion, but the ultimate decision is the man’s, because he has special dispensation by God to be in that position. The equal status of women is a threat to this hierarchy, and thus, a threat to God.
This is why America is seeing so many attacks on women, from trying to pass laws that undermine Roe v. Wade (personhood laws, restrictions on abortions, waiting periods, attempts to push laws to punish abortion doctors, restrictions on being able to get birth control, etc), to going to the trouble of redefining rape as being the woman’s fault, even part of God’s plan, while pushing to give rapists parental rights, to the unfortunate proclamations of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock, et. Al, that babies born of rape are blessings from God, that the female body shuts down its reproductive system when a woman is being raped, etc.). Controlling women’s bodies while at the same time denouncing “big government” is the popular meme of the fundamentalist mind. Women are simply not meant to destroy that Godly hierarchy set up by the Bible, and in their minds if you can control women, you’ve got half the populace conquered for God.

Fundamentalist anti-intellectualism often manifests itself in a sort of “pseudo-intellectualism” by which those with little or no educational background read a few articles or watch a few videos about a particular subject (usually published by their own religious compatriots, particularly about what a scientific theory is and evolution), and consider themselves “educated” because what they read agreed with their worldview, or, if being highly educated, usually get that education in a fundamentalist educational setting. They will then take that “evidence” and proceed to use it against empirical evidence that directly contests and even eviscerates the arguments they have carefully set up around what they have read or seen, and the argument invariably ends with ad hominem attacks against reason, facts, and education — because they have no actual evidence outside of the Bible to use to “win” the argument. A favorite tactic is to call the opposition an “atheist” (or a “liberal”) if someone disagrees with their worldview.

Education is then “demonized” as being a covert movement to “indoctrinate” the masses in the secular worldview, and thus, part of the forces of Satan. Rick Santorum demonstrates this principle admirably. Although he himself is highly educated, with a bachelor’s degree, Master’s degree and JD from Penn State, his Biblical worldview clearly trumps his empirical education and allows him to disregard it as a fly in the ointment in the “light of Biblical truth,” which is, of course, only empirical in that it is in print, in black and white, not empirical that it can actually be proven. Faith is evidence enough, and reason becomes a threat to faith, thus, reason is from Satan, not God. A good case in point is the persecution of Copernicus and Galileo by the Catholic Church, regarding the revolution of the Earth around the sun. This old argument, which has been proven in favor of Copernicus and Galileo, has arisen once again to haunt us.

“Frank Kahn is back, still making feeble little sounds and mindlessly defending his indefensible made up term—–AAGW”

AAAAARGHHHH!

In reality, Frank is making sounds more akin to one undergoing a psychotic break. I will feel bad if that occurs, because I will have helped Frank “go around the bend”, but not too bad, because Frank asked for it and he may then get the help he needs with his problem.

ACTUALLY, Frank, the Skeptical Science “term” that GALT and I talk about is the title of a website (skeptical science.com), that is all about AGW and is in fact using “skeptical” because its mission in life is to debunk the idiocy spouted by the AGW deniers.

In his typical “look it up, but look up the wrong thing” and “once you find some little tidbit, misinterpret it” and “then insist that it’s true” fashion, Frank talks to us about a website that is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT website, only sharing the root of the word “skeptic”. The website and magazine published by the Skeptics Society are both called Skeptic. Shermer came out back in 2006 with a statement that AGW was occurring and he was no longer “skeptical” about it.

So, Frank is always saying “Show us facts”. Just did, Frank, and I did it big time. The FACT is that you are totally WRONG (again)—-everything you said about Skeptical Science, Skeptic, and the Skeptics Society was wrong—-refute that if you can (I’m sure you’ll try)

And in addition to an early death and pre-emptive abortion, Frank now wishes me “deep depression”? What will you wish on me next, Frank? Hemorrhoids and an ingrown toenail? (Ha-Ha—–joke’s on Frank—-I’ve already got those—-and every time I use Preparation H, I think of Frank—-he should squirt a tubefull in his ear—-it would sooth that swollen “brain” of his)

I won’t waste the time playing the “I looked it up and found something I liked game” with Frank. There are many studies and there have been many articles, and it’s a FACT that the SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS (look it up, Frank) is that AGW IS occurring, IS a huge problem, and IS accepted by nearly everyone with standing to have an opinion (which Frank does NOT have).

And in typical “I said it, so it’s true” fashion, Frank continues to INSIST that AAGW is a valid term. Tell you what, Frank—-go “look up” AAGW and cite ONE, just one, source that uses that term (besides you). You will find “human assisted” GW, because that’s what the A (anthropogenic) in AGW means, but only in that deluded mind of yours will you find AAGW. (Did you look up “redundant”?)

And what is your problem with the English language? Wasn’t this clear enough? How many times must I repeat it? Accept truth, Frank, and you may gain some credibility.

“There is no such thing as AAGW, Frank, except in the fevered and self-deluded recesses of your brain. GW is anthropogenic, period—-the word anthropogenic means “caused by man’s presence and/or activities”—–no “assisted” need be added because the GW we are talking about is due to man’s activities”.

AAGW IS NOT A MADE UP WORD? But “adolescent” is?

Frank is “INDEED MEANDERING THROUGH THE FIELDS OF MINDLESSNESS—-he has lost touch with REALITY.

Joke of the day, folks—-Frank says, “I ATTEMPT TO KEEP MY POSTS CIVIL AND REASONABLE”.

“OH, AND I HATE FIRE SO SETTING MYSELF ON FIRE IS NOT LIKELY”, says Frank Frank still doesn’t get “metaphor” (and not much else, either).

PS I have to say this. I have been conducting my own little “thought exercise” with Frank for weeks now, and my school administrator’s “crap detectors” have been humming for quite a while now. They “hum” because NOBODY alive could be as obtuse as Frank seems to be. So, using Occam’s Razor, I sought another explanation for this. The simplest one is that WTS/JAY is having a ball pretending that he is this “Frank Kahn” person and is putting us all on. Good one, JAY, although I’d rather “joust” with the real WTS/JAY, who is far more fun to deal with than “Frank”, even when the real JAY is “way out” on one of his bi-polar days or a bit drunk.

I’m a bit disturbed that DPG would lump me in with Frank and APN in what he so casually terms “bitch slapping”—-I thought DPG was a bit more discerning. Perhaps he hasn’t really carefully read what we have said (I don’t much blame him), but Frank, APN, and I are on very different “wavelengths” and “planes”. DPG should take the time to understand that before he swings the wide paintbrush..

The linked article is a great one, and speaks to one of the biggest problems facing the country—anti-science and anti-intellectualism as fomented by the allegedly “Christian” fundamentalists.
http://churchandstate.org.uk/2013/02/christian-fundamentalists-are-driving-our-country-into-the-dark-ages/

Although Frank has said little that would make one believe that he is even “religious”, he has certainly sucked up much of the anti-intellectualism they spout, particularly in regards to things scientific. APN, on the other hand, HAS made reference to God, but seems to have succumbed more to the “politicization” of science, in which he has sucked up the Kool-aid from the fossil fuel interests, the plutocracy, and the corporate oligarchy, and that is why he “denies”..

It all comes back to the same root—-the Christian fundamentalists have been co-opted by the greedy rich, who support and encourage their mindlessness in order to divide and confuse the country so that they can turn it into a corporate feudal state. AGW is not a concern for the 1%—-they can afford to avoid it, and will get rich off it by selling fossil fuels.

Fear not RBT……. I’m not throwing anyone under a Bus just yet…. I was after your attention… I got it… You responed as I expected….TY… I’m sure APN is crafting a response and I hope that Frank sees what I had intended for him… The processes involving Perception are way under rated at times…. I am hopeful that this published atricle will help inspire all to clear the air so we can get down to the buisiness of discussing the science involved first with time alloted for the politics, the religiosity and even the crazy stuff that has been popularized/demonized, AFTER we agree on a groundwork for the discussion… Everyone has an understanding of the issues, what we need is an agreement on terminology that is covered under the scope. After reading a number of more recent articles I found that Andropogenic Assisted Climate Change seemed pretty close… I’d even accept Andropogenc Aggrevated Climate Change. One of these two should be our scope… Personally trying to discuss anything that only refers to ‘Global Warming’ is focusing on only one area of this inter-linked dynamic system.

DPG, What you need to worry about throwing YOURSELF under a the bus. You certainly got my attention, but not for the reasons you imagine.

After reading a number of more “recent” articles you FOUND that the term Andropogenic Assisted Climate Change “seemed pretty close”?. And you’d accept “Andropogenic Aggravated Climate Change”. You’ve read a number of recent “articles”, you say? I have been studying environmental issues for over 40 years and have read many, many dozens of books and articles, and can’t imagine where you came up with all that foolishness..

Lord love a duck, DPG! There isn’t even ANY SUCH WORD as “andropogenic”, and yet you propose we use that? The closest thing I can think of to it is “androgenic”, and that relates to male hormones and the male endocrine system. Or are you making a joke that too much testosterone on the part of the male members of the species is really the problem? LOL, because one COULD make exactly that case—-if women were running this planet, we’d likely be in far better shape.

I have watched AGW go from an idea to a “debate” to something that is now a SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS. There is no “agreement” to be reached on any kind of “terminology”—-the terminology is THERE and the big problem is that folks like APN and Frank (and now you, I’m afraid), are too self deluded, too wrapped up in false ideologies, and too much in possession of an inflated sense of their own knowledge to accept it.

You say we can begin talking “AFTER we agree on a groundwork for the discussion”?
And that “everyone has an understanding of the issues”? Didn’t you just talk about “perceptions”? I’m going to say it again, you’re not showing much “perceptiveness” if you really think that APN and Frank understand enough SCIENCE to begin to understand the “issues”, and that’s ignoring the fact that they DON’T REALLY WANT to understand—-haven’t you read what they have said on this thread?

And again in slightly different words. I have said pretty much the same thing several times on this thread and others. You seem to be intelligent enough to understand this—-why do I have to repeat it for you? “Terms” are not “negotiable”—-we don’t pick one and use it just to make Frank happy. We must use the terms the climate scientists use, and accept the things on which they have reached SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS. To wit:

CLIMATE CHANGE has been occurring on Earth since the planet acquired oceans and an atmosphere many hundreds of millions of years ago. It is cyclic and influenced by many things, including the sun and the path the earth follows in its orbit. Climate change would be occurring even if there were NO humans on the planet and it will continue even if we become extinct (provided an atmosphere remains).

It is NOT proper to refer to “anthropegenic CAUSED” or “ASSISTED” CLIMATE CHANGE. It is properly called just ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING (AGW). The word “anthropogenic” means “man caused”, and it is redundant and confusing to say in effect “man caused assisted” GLOBAL WARMING.

And the rest——AGW is a recent phenomenon, since man’s activities did not seem to affect the climate much until the massive use of fossil fuels began at the onset of the industrial age.. Man cannot control climate change to any great extent, he can only seek to understand it. Man CAN control his activities that contribute to global warming, which is only one factor affecting climate change, but the one that the CONSENSUS says is rapidly forcing climate change in very worrisome directions.

To close, you can choose to join APN and Frank in the category of “willfully ignorant functional illiterates”, to use GALT’s phrase. You won’t find me joining you in any “discussions” there until you make better sense.

RBT I feel silly….That’ll teach me to not to check my work befor I post!!!…

Anthropogenic Climate Change is an acceptable term….”The term sometimes is used to refer specifically to climate change caused by human activity, as opposed to changes in climate that may have resulted as part of Earth’s natural processes. In this sense, especially in the context of environmental policy, the term climate change has become synonymous with anthropogenic global warming. (I believe is the term you prefer) Within scientific journals, global warming refers to surface temperature increases while climate change includes global warming and everything else that increasing greenhouse gas levels will affect.” (Which is why I prefer Anthropgenic Climate Change) From this and from reading others involved and devoted to the science, One group (which I am now looking for the article) proposed that Anthropogenic ‘Assisted’ Climate Change be equated with global warming induced by human activity… (hence the reason I proposed it!)

However, I did jump the gun by not laying down this discussion first…my appologies… But most importantly, I really do not care what we call it… as it obvious that several terms have been given voice by those involved and as long as the definitions of the terms are acceptable to all then lets continue….

Will ACC or AACC or AGW cover the discussion? If so, let’s all agree that basically they all garner the same science so the exact term may not be as important as agreeing on the definitions, the science involved and the data used to demonstrate the effects……

Stop it, DPG. Either you’re playing with me or you are not the guy who made some earlier comments that I complimented because they made some scientific sense.

Anthropogenic Climate Change is NOT an acceptable term. Where did you get the quote ”The term sometimes is used to refer specifically to climate change caused by human activity, as opposed to changes in climate that may have resulted as part of Earth’s natural processes”? From one of Frank’s “Dummies” books?

I’m not going to repeat it too many more times before I give up on you. “in this sense”, you say?

The term climate change IS NOT synonymous with anthropogenic global warming, which is not the term I “prefer”, it’s the term that is used, like “sky” for that blue thing overhead, and “ground”, for what’s beneath our feet.. “Within scientific journals, global warming refers to SURFACE temperature increases”? Actually, anthropogenic global warming refers to ALL temperature increases occurring in the lithosphere, hydrosphere, and atmosphere that are caused by man’s activities.

You say “From this and from reading others involved and devoted to the science, One group (which I am now looking for the article) proposed that Anthropogenic ‘Assisted’ Climate Change be equated with global warming induced by human activity… (hence the reason I proposed it!)” That is totally mindless horsepucky and the kind of thing Frank Kahn would say. Let’s have a citation for any of that, so that I can try to help you understand what you’re not getting from what you read..

You really do not care what we call it? Well I do, and , as I said, I am tired of trying to talk to people who don’t understand simple English and simple science and refuse to accept it when it’s laid out in front of them.

No, ACC or AACC will NOT cover the discussion—-EVER. And if one cannot “agree” with that, one is never going to be able to discuss the topic of AGW with any authority, at least not with me..

RBT… This is just one of the sources…..

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203711104577201483976477936.html

RBT… A little too far to right for you…OK Then How about this:

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/national-climate-assessment-webinar.html?autologin=true

Sign up and join the webinar offered by the Union Of Concerned Scientists….

Great! A citation to an article with the title “The Anthropogenic Climate-Change Debate Continues”. From the WSJ, no less, which is NOT known for its climate change expertise, but rather for its conservative leanings.

And the “article” is just really a series of comments from folks at the Cato Institute and the Freedom Foundation, all right wing-nut denier sites. You’ll won’t find much real science there, DPG—–it’s all politics. Don’t make the mistake Frank does—-you can’t search a topic and assume that everything you find really means anything. You need to be looking at SCIENCE sites, like skepticalscience.com.

RBT…. Taken from your favorite site: SkepticalScience.com

Posted on 22 February 2013 by rockytom

A number of instructors involved with teaching an introductory climate change science course currently do not select a textbook for their course. They may select multiple popular books on climate change and global warming and perhaps, in addition, require certain readings from the peer-reviewed literature. There is nothing wrong with this approach and there may be advantages, but let’s first examine a few obvious disadvantages.

First, requiring a number of different books on the subject of climate change may result in greater expense than one textbook although individual textbooks may be very expensive; especially those with abundant color illustrations.

Second, individual popular climate change books may emphasize one aspect of the science and reflect the author’s expertise, bias, or biases. It is difficult to get a comprehensive treatment of climate change science from multiple sources. Many of the popular books emphasize global warming, which is only one aspect of climate change. Global cooling during the last ice age, extreme weather, the behavior of atmospheric and ocean currents, glacial retreat and rising sea levels as well as other factors are also aspects of climate change. These subjects are likely covered by the popular books but in a cursory manner in some.

Third, more than one book required for a course may lead to a disjointed treatment of climate science when climate is a continuum over time, although it may be punctuated by certain extreme events in any given area or period of time.

Please note the use of Climate Change and in particular this statement: “Many of the popular books emphasize global warming, which is only one aspect of climate change.”

Is it your intent is to only focus on (A)GW?

And this: The Big Picture

The big picture is that we know the planet is warming, humans are causing it, there is a substantial risk to continuing on our current path, but we don’t know exactly how large the risk is. However, uncertainty regarding the magnitude of the risk is not an excuse to ignore it. We also know that if we continue on a business-as-usual path, the risk of catastrophic consequences is very high. In fact, the larger the uncertainty, the greater the potential for the exceptionally high risk scenario to become reality. We need to continue to decrease the uncertainty, but it’s also critical to acknowledge what we know and what questions have been resolved, and that taking no action is not an option. The good news is that we know how to solve the problem, and that doing so will minimize the impact not only on the climate, but also on the economy.

The bottom line is that from every perspective – scientific, risk management, economic, etc. – there is no reason not to immeditately take serious action to mitigate climate change, and failing to do so would be exceptionally foolish.

You can see it for yourself RBT that even the best in this field use GW and CC selectively to describe the differnet aspects of the science and (to me at least) the introduction of Anthropgenic to either term does not appear to diminish either…. If anything it zero’s in on the one thing that we can change…. Human Behavior….

Much better source! I have been a dues-paying member of the Union Of Concerned Scientists since the 1970′s, and was even a signatory on a full page ad against nuclear power that they put in the Washington post way back then. Neither I not the UCS are against nuclear power today—-we believe that it has a place until we can phase out the fossil fuels that are the real problem. I am also a card-carrying member of the Natural Resources Defense Council, The Sierra Club, Greenpeace, The Ocean Conservancy, The Environmental Defense Fund, The Center for Biological Diversity, and a bunch of others that slip my mind (CRS at 72).

You will find good scoop on the UCS site—-check out NRDC as well.

DPG asks, “Is it your intent is to only focus on (A)GW?”. What I have been saying here? Is it not clear that certain folks, like Frank and APN, totally lack focus and that YOU are a bit fuzzy?

Quite obviously YES and double-YES, DPG, since AGW is what may wipe us and most other life off the planet if we don’t start doing something about it soon, and it’s the ONLY aspect of climate change that we have caused and can control..

You provided a nice little piece by rocky tom, and it speaks well to the thinking behind “textbook selection for an introductory course in climate change”. Just swell of you to do that. You obviously don’t have a lot of science background or you wouldn’t even post this irrelevancy.

Yada-yada-yada. You are not trying to contribute any science here but just doing a “Frank”—– trying to justify your previous weak thinking by finding and quoting something you THINK makes a point.. I will say to you what I said to him—-give it up and get serious.

I have said too many times that the issue is NOT climate change—-CC is always with us, and we will have a two mile thick ice sheet overlaying Chicago again one day,as has happened several times in the past. WE CAN’T CONTROL CC, BUT WE MAY BE ABLE TO CONTROL AGW. And talking about heating and cooling, glaciers advancing and retreating, and ocean levels rising and falling is history—-it’s only useful to us in trying to understand AGW in the here and now.

“We don’t know exactly how large the risk is” and all that follows?. Nice little speech—-what’s the point? No new news there.

And this sentence needs a small change to become PERFECTLY CORRECT.
“The bottom line is that from every perspective – scientific, risk management, economic, etc. – there is no reason not to immediately take serious action to mitigate ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING, and failing to do so would be exceptionally foolish”.

You close with just more “argument” in favor of something that doesn’t need arguing. Are you trying to show that you are more rational than Frank? Every time you come back with this Frank-like horsepucky, you lose credibility and your “rationality quotient” goes down. I will compliment you, that unlike Frank, you show enough restraint to NOT wish me an early death, a retroactive abortion, mental illness, hemorrhoids, or ingrown toenails.

Not only does adding “Anthropogenic” to GW NOT diminish the meaning of GW, it is necessary to add it to GW to really focus on the problem….as you say, human behavior. AGW is part of CC and adding the A to GW IS needed. Adding it to CC is just confusing those who don’t know enough to understand the distinction.

RBT… You have made your point about AGW being the most important thing that we humans may actually be able to correct by changing our behaviors in the VERY near future!! However, It may not be the only issue in the Climate Change arena that needs thorough investigation… Especially if Methane Hydrates are brought into the equaions due to Oceanic warming. I will limit my responses to AGW at this time, but be forewarned, you and I both know that AGW is just one aspect of a much larger system that, when (yet to be determined) tipping points are reached, we may not be talking about AGW anymore! If the surface salinty of the N. Atlantic reaches the point that causes the thermal haline current to stall then we could turn into AGC very quickly (and that is why I stand on ACC/AACC as the comprehensive approach to the issue)… I hope that I am wrong and it simply does not happen…. But that depends on the political response to theis and we know how cobbled up that can be!!

So Onwards and upwards….?

DPG,

I think I’m going to let this thread fade away and make no more comments—-it’s just you and I talking here anymore. I only came back to see if Frank needed some more whack-a-moling, but he seems to have done his usual thing of just running out of mindless things to say and going abruptly quiet. He will be back, unfortunately—–we’ve gone through this same scenario several times with him. The Marines on Iwo Jima didn’t have it much harder than we do dealing with Frank—-we are in the middle of the 68th. anniversary of that battle.

You mention “tipping points”. I lay awake many nights thinking about tipping points. I too think about methyl clathrates, particularly those under the Siberian permafrost—-the ones under the oceans are not likely to break out as soon. My bad dreams are about the thermohaline “conveyor”, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet, the disappearance of the arctic ice pack, the reduced albedo that results and subsequent ocean warming, the disruption and weakening of the circumpolar jet stream that also results, the acidification and warming of the oceans globally. The thing that makes me nervous is that many of these things are positive feedback loops, and once they get rolling, they reinforce themselves and each other. If the “switch” gets thrown, we may not be able to do anything about it.

Onwards and upwards….?, you say I am pessimistic. Catch you on another thread.

Gore had nothing to do with ARPANET. He doesn’t have the mental capacity to understand something as simple as the TCP/IP protocol.

Remember this Eddie, this is the same guy who stated on national TV that the earths temp was MILLIONS of degrees just under the surface of the planet. Like most progressives, he thinks he can say anything he wants without any facts whatsoever and THINKING ADULTS will believe it.

That’s exactly what you are doing!

No Eddie, that is not what I am doing. What I AM trying to do is to get you to think for yourself by not letting other people “Think” for you.

Just because Al Gore has made MILLIONS selling this VOODOO science doesn’t make it real science. Just because something sounds good or right doesn’t necessarily make it right.

Try a little common sense for a change.

Speedle,

Warming of the earth and cooling is not a man-made phenomenon. If you watched Al Gore’s movie, he is not saying it either. We are going through a NATURAL warming trend currently. What is different from the past instances is the man-made influences like industry and industrial farming. Those are variables that help make the warming cycle worse. We cannot say with any definitive word what those variables will result in. But isn’t conservation the smart thing to do? Should be not lead the world in solar, wind energy?

To me, it makes sense.

[comment has been edited]

Apparently I can’t say Gore is a massive untility instrument here.

But he is… I remember Gore from the PMRC nonsense.

Dave, I think you actually answered your own question. Warming and cooling of the Earth is not a man-made phenomenon, and we cannot say (and have not said through science) any definitive word how industry (man) effects that cycle if at all. It amounts to government taxing you for something that is pseudo-science, and then what they would do with that money wouldn’t even be able to prevent the cycles on a global scale (unless you advocate a one world government). How bout we conserve our money from such a BS tax based on BS science?

TML,

Conserving energy and moving to renewable energy sources is the “conservative” thing to do.

I would rather conserve and create new industries and jobs to supply clearner energy and not need it for the planet rather than not do anything and find out too late that our behavior pushed things over the edge.

I go on this principal

x + y = z

That is the equation for millions of years of the earth.

Enter man and large scale farming and industrialization… The equation changes to

x + y + a=?

The new variables will have an impact, we just don’t know to what extent. On this, I am a conservative.

Dave67 said: “We are going through a NATURAL warming trend currently. What is different from the past instances is the man-made influences like industry and industrial farming. Those are variables that help make the warming cycle worse.”
_____________________________________________________________________
Where do you and Al gore get your “facts” from?

The median temp in my geographical area is 62 degrees just like it was over a 1/2 century ago and I can PROVE IT! When did this global warming anomaly occur and where specifically? If it is a GLOBAL phenomenon then why hasn’t the median temp in my geographical area changed in the past 1/2 century? Does your “Science” imply that certain areas would not be affected by this “Global” phenomenon?

Explain it!

Please explain to us how science can accurately measure warming patterns of a planet 4.5 Billion years aged with less than 100 years of data collected to date?

TIME SLICE OF DATA: X = 100 / 4.5 billion
X = 0.000000022%

Have you ever stopped to PONDER the claims of your PROGRESSIVE “SCIENCE”????

The fact is, Mt. St Helens changed our weather patterns more than all Human activity to date and I would suggest that we should be more concerned with the Pacific Ring of Fire or a large object hitting planet earth at 33,000 MPH and not some progressive half-baked nonsense like “Global Warming” or their new term “Climate Change”. Although they are correct when stating climate change, it happens four times a year:

1. Spring
2. Summer
3. Fall
4. Winter

APN

APN shows how puffed up and self important he feels by neglecting to apply some basic thinking and logic skills to what he says.

“The median temp in my geographical area is 62 degrees just like it was over a 1/2 century ago and I can PROVE IT! When did this global warming anomaly occur and where specifically? If it is a GLOBAL phenomenon then why hasn’t the median temp in my geographical area changed in the past 1/2 century? Does your “Science” imply that certain areas would not be affected by this “Global” phenomenon?” And demands that someone “Explain it!”

APN neglects to specify for us what his “geographic area” is, thereby making any real discussion of that point moot until he does. If it is something the size of a county and he has records going back 50 years in this one small area that PROVE “it”, why can he not accept the validity of records going back 100 years for a whole planet that seem to prove some “it” as well? Logic fail.

And he compounds his logic fail by talking about 100 years being .000000000000000X of a big number without realizing that his “geographic area” is probably a similarly small proportion of the surface of the entire planet. There are probably many areas where the “median temp” is the same as it was at some time in the past, as well as many where the median temp is higher or lower, always remembering that terms like median, mean, and average are relative and can be misleading. Median is a term that just means “middle”—-halfway between the highest and lowest—-temperatures can be swinging widely in a “geographic area”, with many new highs in summer and new lows in winter (and vice-versa) and the median can remain unchanged.

APN asks Dave “Where do you and Al gore get your “facts” from?” Dave works hard at “getting facts” and does pretty well at it, even though he may not have a huge science background to draw on and sometimes misinterprets things a bit. We all get our “facts” from looking at the history of the Earth and the history of man’s impact on the earth in all respects, climate change and global warming being two areas of concern.

APN says “Please explain to us how science can accurately measure warming patterns of a planet 4.5 Billion years aged with less than 100 years of data collected to date?”
That’s easy, APN, because we have way more than 100 years of data collected to date on what has gone on re: past climate change—-we have looked at ice cores going back a million years, fossils and sediments going back hundreds of millions of years, and geologic evidence going back billions of years. It is true that we are frantically gathering data today (satellites are a most important tool and they only go back ~50 years) and trying to catch up, but we are making much progress and the vast majority of what we discover supports the idea of AGW. We have gone from a historic level of CO2 in the 250-280 PPM range to a level of ~400 PPM in just the time since the beginning of the industrial revolution and the start of the heavy use of fossil fuels. We have seen many signs that this CO2 buildup is having the effect of causing global warming. There’s a reason that those who fight the idea of AGW are called “skeptics” and “deniers” rather than those terms being applied to those who say AGW is occurring. It’s because the preponderance of evidence is on the side of AGW and that is the truth accepted by the vast majority of scientists—-the deniers and skeptics are the “heretics” here.

APN makes a huge misstatement of fact when he says, “The fact is, Mt. St Helens changed our weather patterns more than all Human activity to date”

The simplest web search will reveal the truth there—-and here it is in simple terms, from Scientific American Frontiers

“Volcanic eruptions always have a significant effect on the local environment, but three factors determine whether an eruption will have an impact on global climate”.

“The direction and force of the eruption determines where the debris from the volcano winds up. Unless the gas and dust ends up in the stratosphere – the upper layers of the atmosphere that can convey pollutants around the globe – rain and snow will wash it out of the lower levels of the atmosphere”.

“In 1980, for example, Mount St. Helen’s erupted, spewing a billion cubic meters of ash into the sky over Washington state. But the force of the explosion was largely horizontal, so the eruption had no overall global impact”

TO EMPHASIZE, THE ERUPTION HAD NO OVERALL GLOBAL IMPACT APN?

APN is correct that we should be concerned with the Pacific Ring of Fire or a large object hitting planet earth at 33,000 MPH. Eruptions of super volcanoes and asteroid impacts have occurred many times in the past and a repeat today would threaten all life on earth. Unfortunately, we can’t do much about those things.

We most certainly CAN do something about what APN so smugly and ignorantly calls “progressive half-baked nonsense like “Global Warming”. He further displays his ignorance by saying “their new term Climate Change”. Climate change has been going on since the time Earth developed oceans and an atmosphere, APN. The “new” term is AGW, since that has been going on for perhaps 150 years. Making that error is Dumb.

But saying that the change of seasons is “climate change” is even Dumber. Need I explain why?

I will ask APN—-”Have you ever stopped to PONDER the consequences of your rhetorical chest-beating and mindless denial of “SCIENCE”???? (and all true science is “progressive”, by the way)

RBFeeler said ” Unfortunately, we can’t do much about those things. ”

Boy, it is VERY difficult following your mindless tripe. You think maybe you could type a little faster or cut out the repetitive junk?

I do however agree with one line you stated, as outlined above. I bet it is hard for someone like yourself to admit such a weakness. Especially given the fact that you see yourself as a “god of the planet” which appears to be a “Progressive” illness.

APN has now totally lost it. He makes no attempt here at intelligent debate or discussion and just mindlessly attacks.

My mindless tripe? A lot of that “tripe” was really the truth needed to counter your ignorance and “logic fails”. You think maybe you could cut out the repetitive attack junk and really say something substantive? How about telling us more about that ‘geographic area” where you say nothing changes? Is it Lake Wobegon? We all know that’s the the place where all the children are above average, so you can’t be from there. Where is it that the median temperature hasn’t changed for 50 years?

And “god of the planet”? Lord love a duck, APN. Anyone who would say such a thing is only demonstrating their OWN weakness and inability to carry on an intelligent discussion. Start making sense or give it up—-you are looking more foolish with every comment you make.

RBT said: And “god of the planet”? Lord love a duck, APN. Anyone who would say such a thing is only demonstrating their OWN weakness and inability to carry on an intelligent discussion. Start making sense or give it up—-you are looking more foolish with every comment you make.”

There is nothing intelligent about this entire subject og global warming because it was hatched by a progressive idiot who perceives the rest of us as “Simpletons”.

I will leave the foolishness to you who appears to have a PHD in the subject matter.

APN is still politicizing a scientific problem when he says, “….global warming was hatched by a progressive idiot who perceives the rest of us as “Simpletons”.

Perhaps he is referring to Al Gore? Gore was among the earliest to speak out very publicly on AGW, but he is by no means an idiot nor is he the one who “hatched” the concept—–that’s just right wing-nut boogeyman stuff.

Nor does he regard the rest of us as simpletons. He actually was quite respectful of everyone’s intelligence by bringing up such a complex problem and trusting that the public would work hard to understand it. He capitalized on his celebrity to gain publicity for the topic and we need to thank him for that.

The special interests would have been very happy if the topic had never been brought up by anyone but obscure scientists speaking at scientific conferences. It blew their minds when DVD’s appeared on video store shelves.

FYI, The discovery of the greenhouse effect (which is the basic phenomenon underlying AGW), actually dates back to to Fourier, a French mathematician and scientist, who came up with the idea in the 1820′s (nearly 200 years ago).

If you are leaving the discussion, much of the foolishness will go with you. I don’t have a PHD in the subject matter, but I do have enough knowledge that I feel comfortable sharing it with anyone who wants to seek truth about AGW. My suggestion still stands for you and the “rendars” of PLD. Forget the political horsepucky, stop trying to act as if you know more than you do, educate yourself, and come back with real questions—-those of us who “stand the wall” against the ignorance of AGW denial will be happy to talk to you.

RBT said ” -those of us who “stand the wall” against the ignorance of AGW denial will be happy to talk to you.

You are the one in denial my friend. You must have some major investments at risk, correct?

Bottom line, at 72 years aged, get a life, and leave my life to me. I don’t need your protection or education on a politically motivated scam!

APN is still coming around and spouting mindlessness? I thought he was leaving us to what he considers to be our “ignorance” (because we fail to accept the brilliance of his non-arguments and the depths of his ideological mindlessness).

Bottom line, at 72 years of age I’ve got a life, and will be more than happy to see you leave PLD and take your “life” with you and out of mine. We don’t need your ignorance and lack of science understanding cluttering up any intelligent discussion of a very important topic, one that you are apparently unable to think of as anything but “a politically motivated scam”. You’ve been scammed, APN, but by the fossil fuel interests that use use you as a dumb foot soldier in their war against science and the 99%..

RBT, it is not APN who is spouting mindlessness. Those immovable mentalities who think nothing of ruining our economy to pursue a brand of ecology that not only fails scientific muster but often defies common sense logic are the ones “spouting mindlessness”.

If you folks just need some kind of global disaster scenario in order to charge your mental batteries, why don’t you concentrate on the much more likely disaster associated with random space rocks hitting the earth and really messing up your weekend plans? Finding a way to deter such an occurrence is not only more constructive, but it will not crater our economic health either.

Excellent analogy Soeedle! But, unfortunately, your words will never connect with this individuals ears.

Maybe RBT needs to PONDER why GOD gave him two ears and one mouth?

Pretty simple stuff for those of us who have a functioning brain not cluttered with progressive foolishness.

APN

Cliff,

I may be wrong but “Cap and Trade” was brought to us by the GOP

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Presence-of-Mind-Blue-Sky-Thinking.html

Yes Dave,
You are right when you say you may be wrong, because you are wrong

Bill,

Why and I wrong?

Care to elaborate?

Accusations is what Bill is good for so we’ll have to overlook his disability.

Eddie,i think he’s jesting and making fun of that stupid liberal news lady that asked if the meteor strike was linked to global warming!i know i made fun of it!and she was blonde on top of it!!…Why didn’t the blonde want to date the Russian meteor?….

It didn’t make an impact on her!!…ha ha ha ha……

GOD help us when eddie47d asserts himself as a CO2 specialist. Let’s see if we can get a CC bill passed by the libtards based upon eddie47d immense knowledge of “Science”!

NO RBT, your ignorance of things scientific is appalling!

Bust you open another bottle of booze boy or take another toke and then FLASHBACK to them good ole days when you were indoctrinating those 8th grade students with your progressive foolishness!

Any comment that includes the statements that

Science is sometimes spelled Seance.

Science is just one more major religion, not quite as militant as Islam, but gaining fast.

And

Right now quantum metaphysics seems to have as many right answers as science.

Is not worth taking seriously and replying to in detail—–so I won’t.

Go back to fomenting rebellion in Canada and leave us alone down here. We have enough home grown lunacy without you adding more.

BOYSCOUT….. Key words…. “ON YOUR PAYROLL….. and Agrees with ME” You pay his way!!!! do you really think he will not support his benifactor??????

Why David, how very astute of you to have noticed! You get an A Humor class and study up real hard as you seem to be falling behind in that department. Hint; look for the punch lines.

Punch lines? If BS thinks there is anything funny on his comment, I can tell you where to look for them. On his head, because only someone who has been hit one too many times could be so confused.

There’s a reason for all those “dumb blonde” jokes that we hear. And some of the dumbest can be seen on Faux News. Someone on Faux probably had to explain it to them too.

PS There’s a great clip of one of the Faux News blondes (Gretchen Carlson) doing her stuff—-available on Media Matters. She and Steve Doozy interviewed a so-called Faux News “expert” who baldly stated that “Germany is doing great with solar because they have a lot more sun than we do—-lots of sun”. And Doozy and the blonde nodded sagely and agreed with her. LOL

In case PLD readers are unaware of the facts, virtually EVERY part of the continental U.S. gets more sun than Germany, including the rainiest part of the country—-the Pacific Northwest. One need only look at the history of the 8th AAF, who in WW2 were unable to bomb Germany for days and weeks at a time because of the clouds.

Well heck Eddie47D, I’m sure if Oppenheimer said it, shucks, it must be TRUE!

Reid…let me guess. When you heard the neighbor kid saying they were studying homo sapiens in school, you went ballistic because to you it was proof positive they were teaching a Gay Agenda.

Facts do not cease to exist just because you ignore them.

It takes one to know one

Ron…the whole problem with the TPers, American Taliban and the other simpletons is that they are so certain of their opinions and themselves … while wiser people are full of doubt and see the need to expand man’s knowledge.

Reid and Ron? (Are they pseudonyms for the R & R who were so badly defeated in November? Are they making a comeback on PLD by appealing to the mindless with new stupidities?)

I can agree with “Mr Crystal, in trying to show off his cleverness, comes across as dumb”. That is self-evident, and I have commented elsewhere about that. Mr Gore. and Flashy, on the other hand, are not “dumb”, and Flash has been particularly eloquent in exposing the mindless to some ‘inconvenient truths” with his comment here. Good job, Flash!

“Reid…let me guess. When you heard the neighbor kid saying they were studying homo sapiens in school, you went ballistic because to you it was proof positive they were teaching a Gay Agenda”.

I’ll buy that scenario—-and Reid probably got bug-eyed, ranted and stuttered, waved his arms, stomped around, and spit all over anyone close by as he went “ballistic”. Speaking of “ballistic”, he probably then got out one of his guns and fondled it for reassurance that at least SOME things were right in the world.

Flash speaks only of those who think rationally when he says “Facts do not cease to exist just because you ignore them”. For some folks (all too many on PLD), facts that contradict what they WANT to believe DO IN FACT “cease to exist”. That old confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, motivated reasoning thing.

And Ron demonstrates the power of his intellect for us with: “It takes one to know one”
Lord love a duck, Ron!

Flash-in-the pan said: Facts do not cease to exist just because you ignore them.

Does that statement include progressive “facts”??

Just because you drink the progressive Koolaid doesn’t make Jobal warming a fact my friend. Let’s see your FACTS!

Go back and this time read the article. If you can’t understand it after you read it this time around, get someone who can explain it to you. It would take a fifth grade level education.

Look…you’re driving a semi with a full load and realized you took the wrong road. you can’t just stop, flip the truck around, and take off back. It takes a few thousand feet to halt the erroneous progress. Same concept. it took 30 years for us to halt the progress and the holes to begin repairing themselves. That’s after only 50 years of CFRs being released into the air.

With climate change, we’ve had over a century tossing junk into the atmosphere, cutting forests with abandon, altering ocean currents, etc. Far more complex and far more lasting effects. With luck and action, we may slow down the rate of change. instead of 50-100 years to adapt to the new climates etc…we can stretch that out to 100-150 years. Less impact on society and all that affects it.

99% of climatologists are on the same page. The extremists grasp at the 1% who get paid for being the 1% against the science and data.

So rendarsmith…tell us..what if you’re wrong?

rendarsmith should know that is is incorrect to say that “global warming is now causing blizzards, which you know…cool everything off!”. Blizzards, being a weather phenomenon, only “cool things off” where they hit, and only until the weather changes, usually to a warmer state. No one with any real science background has ever said AGW “causes” blizzards, only that AGW appears to be causing an increase in the frequency of extreme weather events and their severity. Do you see the difference, rendar?

“So apparently global warming causes both….no matter what the weather does, it is somehow due to global warming….and we must stop it or we’ll all die!” Faulty logic—-see previous paragraph.

I haven’t read the article, but don’t need to do that in order to address some more faulty logic (or poor reading comprehension) here.

“They mention that higher temperatures cause the air to hold more water….so that when it gets cold enough it causes more snow….but wait a minute, when it “gets cold enough”, how is it holding water? It has to have the higher temperature to hold the water!” Rendar apparently fails to understand that our weather is the result of “collisions” between air masses of different pressures, temperatures, and moisture content. When a frigid air mass (usually drier, as Rendar appreciates) collides with a warmer air mass (usually holding much more water), the water precipitates out along the boundary, as rain in the summer and snow in the winter. That’s why blizzards (and any other “extreme” weather occur in “bands”.

“And assuming that the globe is warming (how do you really measure that?), have these “scientists” taken into consideration any other source for it other than man-made CO2? Doing so might mean less grant money for their “studies”….so I doubt it”. A snarky finish to some more logic fail by Rendar. Anyone who asks “how do they really measure that?” is not qualified to talk about AGW. Ditto with “was there consideration of any other source?”. You need to study the issue, Rendar. Learn some facts before you blindly shoot your mouth off and look foolish. That’s what the whole thing is about, Rendar. We DO have measurements of many kinds, we HAVE examined all “sources”—-there DOES appear to be a problem with man-caused global warming (AGW). Do yourself a favor and learn more—-the Skeptical Science website is the best you’ll find, although you may not understand it all if you don’t have some science and math in your background. If you don’t understand something you read, ask those of us who do and we’ll walk you through it.

More mindless anti government horsepucky here. “And let’s assume that they are right. What is the guv’ment supposed to do? How are they going to fix it? How is giving the guv’ment more power going to help us? Carbon tax? So paying the guv’ment more money (which will increase prices everywhere) is somehow going to fix it all?”
Yeah, trying to do something about the AGW problem just MIGHT “fix” it if we try hard enough. Sitting in the corner and muttering, which is all you are doing, will get us nowhere.

This last is just a mindless waste of words and faulty logic—-just parroting of some of the same old horsepucky. Why even bother?
“How about asking Al Gore and his climatatologist cronies to stop using private jets and limousines everywhere they go. If the strongest supporters of the movement don’t follow their own advice, you can’t expect us to”.

I forgot RBT to inform rendar that snow, in fact, acts as an insulator and actually can warm up a snow camp since it is warer than frigid air (see eg igloos)

Ah well….he probably thinks eskimos do live in igloos year round…

Eskimos DON’T live in igloos year round…? Hard to believe—-got a source for that?

RBT…didn’t you get the latest memo? That’s where we’re building one of them there “secret” FEMA Camps (using non union Eskimo labor). Figure if these folks are so anti union, using non-union “quality” work would give them what they ask for. Remember,…it’s a secret no one is supposed to know about . Shhhhh

RBT – excuse me! Winter, not blizzards, when blizzards hit, it is colder!

Flashy –
I DID read the article. You’ve yet to explain the contradiction.

“99% of climatologists are on the same page. The extremists grasp at the 1% who get paid for being the 1% against the science and data.” Really? Can you prove this? These scientists who support the theory are receiving government grants to study it, gee why would they be motivated to continue researching? There are many scientists who oppose it, including those at NASA. But no, we should believe the “5th grade” level thinkers like you who blindly support it, even those that support it the most don’t practice what they preach! Again, if it’s such a hazard why don’t the climatologists practice what they preach???

I tell you what Flashy, why don’t you explain the theory to me. Explain to me how man-made CO2 is causing the globe to heat up, and convince why ONLY man-made CO2 could be the cause (and no other phenomenon like the sun or depleting the ozone layer) of it. It’s 5th grade science right? You passed 5th grade right? So let’s see if you understand it.

Right Brain Thinker – “how is it holding water?”

REALLY?? Did you really just ask that? Did you flunk out of physical science in high school? Did you go to high school? When air has a higher temperature it has higher HUMIDITY thus has MORE water vapor in the air, which is the argument in Flashy’s article if you’d bother to read it. But the contradiction is the temperature has to go DOWN for water to freeze and cause a blizzard! Last I checked, it has to be COLD to snow. Basic science….geez!

“Anyone who asks “how do they really measure that?” is not qualified to talk about AGW”

Really? So what do they do? Stick a thermometer up the earth’s butt? I’m asking what method they are using to determine these temperatures. Are they measuring ground temperature? Air temperature? Is that all we’re doing is just measuring the temperature outside (which could be influenced by a variety of different things)? What qualifies you to talk about this? Did you perform these tests yourself? How do you even know they’re accurate? Or do you just take on blind faith that they are?

“We DO have measurements of many kinds, we HAVE examined all “sources”—-there DOES appear to be a problem with man-caused global warming (AGW).”

Ok, what are they? Tell me. And what makes you so sure it’s being caused by man-made CO2 and ONLY man-made CO2? Maybe YOU need to research this a bit more. Instead of telling everyone else that they need to research more, why don’t you confirm what you are saying.

“Yeah, trying to do something about the AGW problem just MIGHT “fix” it if we try hard enough. Sitting in the corner and muttering, which is all you are doing, will get us nowhere.”

Horsepucky? Really? You didn’t even bother to answer the question. What is the government supposed to do about it if it is really happening? Why doesn’t Gore practice what he preaches? You try to quickly dismiss it by being “apolitical” but you know that it is a good point. If those that support it the most don’t walk the walk, you can’t expect anyone else to. It’s not wise to follow hypocrites. What about China? They put out more CO2 than we do. How are you and the other climatologists going to convince them to do…..whatever it is our government is going to do to save us?

Why don’t you try answering the actual QUESTIONS instead of lecturing me about how little I know about it. Everything you think you know about this is based on blind faith that these scientists that support it are telling you, but the debate is far from over. You say those that oppose it have financial motivation to do so, but so do the ones that support it! Have you already forgotten the “global cooling” scare of the 80′s or that Greenland used to be green? By the way, what makes you so sure it’s CO2 and not depletion of the ozone layer? Wouldn’t more UV rays passing through cause the globe to heat up more than CO2? Did you even bother to ask this question? What about sunspots or sun cycles? No, certain scientists support it and big fat cat politicians support it, therefore it MUST be right! Right?

By the way, are you aware that by typing on this page you are using electricity, 80% of which is generated by burning fossil fuels? You have just contributed to man-made CO2 RBT! Congrats!

I’m not sure what you’re saying here, Rendar, so you’ll have to spell it a bit more if you want a reply. “RBT – excuse me! Winter, not blizzards, when blizzards hit, it is colder!”

I have now read the article also, and the thrust of the article is that there is really NO contradiction, even though it might seem that way to those who don’t understand the science. Yes, there can be less snow everywhere but more blizzards and more snow in those blizzards. The science is there to support that.

Rendar goes off on a mindless and borderline nutty rant with comments like:

Can you prove this?
There are many scientists who oppose it, including those at NASA.
But no, we should believe the “5th grade” level thinkers like you who blindly support it
Those that support it the most don’t practice what they preach!
Again, if it’s such a hazard why don’t the climatologists practice what they preach???

It’s sad that Rendar doesn’t realize that HE is the “5th. grade thinker here”, and may not know enough science to ever really understand AGW. In which case, he will have to rely on faith as to which scientists he believes—-the 97+% who believe AGW is occurring or the few who deny it nearly all of whom have been shown to take money from fossil fuel interests or groups who do. Rendar rants about “government grants”—-the government grants do not come with the strings attached that the deniers grants do—the government, believe it or not, does not have an agenda. PS. Speaking of NASA , you should read anything you can by James Hansen, a senior NASA scientist who has been on the AGW case for decades.

Rendar demands that someone else “teach” him when he must do the work himself—go to Skeptical Science, rendar, and ask us specific questions about what you find there. You have to go find out for yourself the answer to rthe very basic question “Explain to me how man-made CO2 is causing the globe to heat up”. We don’t have enough hours in our day for that (and you can’t afford our rates).

No, unfortunately, It’s NOT 5th grade science—-It would take a smart high school kid who took all the science and math he could to begin to fully understand the basics, and folks with college degrees who only took “survey” courses in science as electives will only understand it “all” if they work at it.

rendarsmith continues to angrily and mindlessly rant on, rather than slow down and read what flash and I have said to him and really think about it. Shades of Frank Kahn—-are we going to end up in a whack-a-mole situation here also?

“When air has a higher temperature it has higher HUMIDITY thus has MORE water vapor in the air, which is the argument in Flashy’s article if you’d bother to read it. But the contradiction is the temperature has to go DOWN for water to freeze and cause a blizzard!” Again, there is NO contradiction in Flashy’s article, just an inabiltiy or unwillingness on rendar’s part to see that.

Rendar shows his lack of knowledge here. He may not know that one of the driest places on earth is Antarctica, where the temperatures are VERY low. Another of the driest places on earth is the Sahara, which also happens to be one of the hottest. When air has more water vapor in it, it has higher “humidity”, and it IS possible for air that is “hotter” to be less “humid” than air that is “colder”, at least within a narrow range. He also didn’t read or understand what I said about blizzards occurring at the boundary between two air masses, one warmer and wetter, the other colder and drier. It’s the cooling down of the wet warm air as it rides up over the cold dry air that causes the snow to fall down THROUGH the cold air to the ground. It’s the degree of difference in temperature and water vapor that causes the blizzard conditions. Rendar may not be aware that sometimes snow forms at higher and colder altitudes but melts as it falls into lower warmer air and becomes rain, or even evaporates so that nothing reaches the ground at all. Does rendar know how hail forms?

Rendar is coming close to ending this discussion with the ignorance and hostility he displays with, “Really? So what do they do? Stick a thermometer up the earth’s butt? What qualifies you to talk about this?” Maybe rendar hasn’t seen it on other posts, but I have told all that I have a BA and an MA in science fields, have taught high school physics and biology, and have studied environmental issues like AGW since before earth day in 1970.

And “why don’t I confirm what you are saying”. How do you suggest I do that? And why should I do that? You have either not read, not understood, or not accepted much of what I said. I am not going to waste any more time with you until you do those things and get yourself better educated—-that’s your job, not mine.

All the “Whys” and other questions are just more of the same—-anger over ignorance, the best illustration of which is rendar’s lack of understanding about UV and infrared radiation from the sun. Does he think AGW is much influenced by UV levels?

A final dose of anger and ignorance with, “By the way, are you aware that by typing on this page you are using electricity, 80% of which is generated by burning fossil fuels? You have just contributed to man-made CO2 RBT! Congrats!”

By the way, that is a pointless barb since you are doing the same. And it is YOUR mindlessness and ignorance that is causing me to expend even more electricity trying to help you see the light—-so most of the increase in CO2 here is your fault.l Congrats!

So rather than explaining the theories and how they work, you dismiss everything as blind rants. Why don’t you just answer the questions asked. Face it, everything you think you know is based on blind faith and you cannot defend it. By asking you to back up what you say and explain your theories, I am ranting. How dare anyone ask the great RBT to explain and back up what he says!

BTW, I know what the theories are. I have read extensively about them. I just don’t believe them because I think there are too many other explanations that have not been ruled out. Too many questions come to mind, like the ones I mentioned, and all I get are vague insulting answers like the ones you gave. I want to see if you truly know what they are and what convinces you that this is actually what is happening. Apparently asking you to confirm that is too much for you. Your lib politicians say it, so it must be true. By the way, 99% of scientists support it? Where do you get that number? You have a BA and MA in “science fields”? Yeah right, which science fields? Theoretical science? Biology? If this stuff is so basic to you, it should be easy for you to explain, but instead you dismiss everything as rants. Scientists at NASA discredit the whole man-made global warming theory. I think they are a little more advanced than you and your “BA and MA in science fields”. Again, did you conduct any of these tests yourself? Or were you instructed to teach these theories from a text book handed to you? These are questions that need to be asked, but you and your “BA and MA in science fields” are above defending your theories I guess. By the way, wasn’t it also “science” that said the world was flat? Later disproven. Wasn’t it also “science” that said the universe revolved around the earth? Later disproven. Wasn’t it also “science” that said you could transmute metal into gold? Sir Isaac Newton believed that then died of mercury poisoning. It’s been “science” that said the appendix is a useless organ for humans, now they are finding that it actually has a use. So many things we thought were true because of “science” are later disproven by later “science”. But go ahead, believe your “science field” textbooks and dismiss everyone else’s theory because we all know your “BA and MA” rules over all. Heaven forbid anyone else ask why. That’s just ranting, right?

“By the way, that is a pointless barb since you are doing the same. And it is YOUR mindlessness and ignorance that is causing me to expend even more electricity trying to help you see the light—-so most of the increase in CO2 here is your fault.l Congrats!”

I’m not holding a gun to your head and making you type these ridiculous answers. You control your hands, not I. If you are so against wasting electricity do something else. It would be nice if you would actually EXPLAIN the theory and why the other options I’ve mentioned are not valid, but you’ve yet to do it making this whole argument pointless. You support the theory and want everyone else to (otherwise you wouldn’t have said anything) so you defend it. Otherwise quit wasting electricity. Don’t you have some “science field” class to teach?

Rendar,

What you seem to be missing here is that since the late ’70s Oceanographers and climate scientists have been placing bouys with submerged temperature sensors, submerged flow detectors and surface temperature sensors all around the planet, 10s of thousands sensors have been placed. The data recorded from these sensors has been carefully analyzed by multitudes of other scientists and used to verify atmospheric and oceanographic simulators… With the advancements in pure computing power of modern computers these scientists have made minor ‘tweeks’ in the models to see where the models take them when sped up to cover decades and hundreds of years… when models that were ran in the 80′s, 90,s early 2000s began to show that tipping points were being met it set alarms off all through the science communities!!… For example, I believe a study in the late 80′s suggested that that in 40 to 100 years the polar ice caps would begin to melt…When this last summer it was found that most of the North Polar ice had infact melted these simulations (or climate models) were vindicated!!! Your adherance to the BS from the climated change deniers will not change this…. What the rest of us have discovered is that people made ultra-wealthy by investing in oil, gas and coal were not happy with obvious direction that climate science was going…So the BIG money begain to talk LOUDLY…they (Koch Bros, Karl Rove etc) played on your fears as well as the fears of the other ignorants that refused or simply did not want to see what was happening….. WE HUMANS are contributing to existing forces of nature to unbalance a complex system that often swings wildly ALL ON IT’S own…. WE HUMANS are speeding up processes that usually take 10s of thousands of years to happen all on it’s own…This is what we are trying to teach you…. If you care for the future of your own children and grandchildren you will listen and pay heed…. And YOU will begin to EDUCATE yourself rather just blindly believe the easier of the two veiwpoints…..

Rendar’s rantings have now risen (dropped?) to the level of AOE’s (Anal Orifice Emissions). He is right, no one is holding a gun to my head and forcing me to try to educate rendar. This entire rant here asks no real questions so I’m not going to reply because of the “never argue with a drunk” rule, and rendar IS talking like a drunk here—-someone who is drunk on his own self-image as a debater and orator and possessor of a powerful intellect.

I’ll tell you what, R, how about stopping the over the top insults and asking just two or three specific questions—-if you ask nicely, I might answer, although the massive ignorance and incomprehension you continue to display over the “blizzard” business makes me think you are a leader among GALT’s crew of “willfully ignorant functional illiterates” and making the offer is useless.

David Paul G gets it! Well said, DPG, particularly about the motivation of the deniers!.

However, I am afraid that rendar will likely not hear you.

It’s obvious that Rendar and many like him that visit PLD DO just like complaining. They are consumed by fear and angry about many things, and that fear and anger has made them easy prey for those who would use them as foot soldiers in several ideological wars in this country. In order to assuage that fear and anger, they seem willing to go against their own self interest and follow their puppet masters. I wish that “they” would read more articles—–on other sites—-ones that might open their eyes to reality.

RBT, who’s complaining? It’s you and libs that are always complaining about a BS theory that the globe is heating due to our CO2 (but not the climatologists’). Then you guys complain when someone dares to challenge it. It seems people like you wouldn’t know hypocrisy if it bit you in the ass.

It never helps to attempt to teach a person who is incapable of reason. RBT, although he lies about saying he has a BS and MS degree in science, has shown many times that his ability to accept truth and reason is very limited. He always resorts to belittling and name calling because he is incapable of logical discourse. He will ignore any scientific evidence that goes against his juvenile ideas about anything we discuss. While I agree that rendar made some very basic mistakes in his statements, it was unnecessary to stoop to name calling. You will also note that RBT totally ignored the question about sunspot activity as a possible contributor to the climate change. I could post a link that shows him the obvious reason that man made CO2 is not the cause of climate change, it is only a small contributing factor. There have even been recent studies that show how metropolitan areas contribute to warming effects on a global scale. This warming has little or nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels, it is due to the heating of things like asphalt which radiate the temperature back to the atmosphere at night. I dont recall the exact city names used in the study but one U.S. city was shown to have warmed the temperature in Europe. As the smart scientists have stated, the global climate change is a very complex issue. People, like RBT, that try to simplify it into man made climate change due to burning of fossil fuels is just myopic pseudoscience.

Lord love a duck! Frank Kahn arrives to pool his ignorance with Randar and initiate a new round of Whack-a-Mole. Guess what, Frank, I’m going to watch a Netflix movie now rather than whacking you. You’re home free here—-why don’t you and Rendar pile your “willfully ignorant functional illiteracy” higher and deeper for all to see and be amused by. Like the Terminator, I’ll be back.

A quick note For those who are not familiar with Frank, he is someone who knows a little but pretends he knows a lot. He often gets the simplest of facts correct but goes far astray when he attempts to put them together into complex thoughts. For Frank, anything beyond 1 + 1 = 2 is difficult territory. Be warned of that if you read his stuff.

Frank also has difficulty finishing what he starts. He has “chickened out” on at least two direct challenges—-on “super luminal” travel and “myth busting” AGW. While I’m gone, perhaps he will use the interval to explain those failures to you.

Just to give you a little focus on Frank’s level of thinking and debate abilities, I have edited out all of his comments but some words that illustrate his shortcomings in those areas.

incapable of reason
lies
ability to accept truth and reason
very limited
belittling and name calling
incapable of logical discourse
juvenile ideas about anything we discuss
totally ignored the question about sunspot activity
I could post a link
obvious reason that
man made CO2 is not the cause of climate change
recent studies that show how metropolitan areas contribute to warming effects
This warming has little or nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels
it is due to the heating of things like asphalt
I dont (sic) recall the exact city names used in the study
one U.S. city was shown to have warmed the temperature in Europe.
smart scientists have stated, the global climate change is a very complex issue.
People that try to simplify it into man made climate change
due to burning of fossil fuels
just myopic pseudoscience.

All of what I have said about Frank and more is demonstrated there—-ignorance, confusion, lack of focus, lack of logic, and the dangers of thinking one knows more than those who do. I’ll say it again, Frank—-you are a stitch (and the educator in me feels bad that you are also such a very sad case).

Where I come from we dont whack things like you we just put them out of our misery. Your ignorance knows no bounds, and your responses prove it. I am sick of your childish moronic whining RBT (no brain pretender). Come on, tell us about your supposed degrees in “SCIENCE RELATED FIELDS”. I can see you got a BS in BS, just wondering which college it was from, maybe the McDonalds institute of burger flipping?

I taught a SCIENCE RELATED FIELD in a college, what did you teach again? High school physics? You still have not provided any proof of your education or career. What exactly do they consider high school physics where you come from?

Whack a mole, there is only one thing you appear to be able to whack and it aint called a mole where I come from.

Frank Kahn says a bunch of mindless and stupid things before saying anything even remotely intelligent. Frank doesn’t seem to understand that is not the way to get the audience to agree with you—-you know, you folks who are sitting on the side trying to decide if Frank is more credible that RBT?

Frank says, “Where I come from we dont (sic) whack things like you (comma fault) we just put them out of our (?) misery. Your ignorance knows no bounds, and your responses prove it. I am sick of your childish moronic whining RBT (no brain pretender)”.

Frank continues the mindlessness with, “Come on, tell us about your supposed degrees in “SCIENCE RELATED FIELDS”. I can see you got a BS in BS, just wondering which college it was from, (comma fault) maybe the McDonalds institute of burger flipping?”

Like I said, not likely to win Frank many fans.

Is he ever going to say something worth discussing? YES! He avers that he “taught a SCIENCE RELATED FIELD in a college”. Wonderful, Frank—–let’s hear all about the “course” you taught, what type of “college” you taught at/for, and how the course fits into a particular “science related field” (interesting choice of words there). There’s yet another challenge that Frank may not rise to. LET’S HEAR IT, FRANK. ANTE UP.

To be fair, I will take the time to answer Frank’s question. Perhaps that will be of some value to those who are watching and trying to assess which of us—-Frank or I—-has more credibility

Frank asks, “What did you teach again? High school physics?” Yes Frank, but only for part of the day for a couple of years. I taught high school biology for all of the 7-1/2 years that I taught before moving into school administration, at all levels from slow learners through regular classes to classes for the gifted.

Frank asks, “What exactly do they consider high school physics where you come from?”

The same thing that everyone considers it to be everywhere else, Frank. Physics examines the physical world from many directions—-motion and mechanics, the behavior of light and optics, heat and thermodynamics, electricity and magnetism, sound, atomic and nuclear physics, astronomy and planetary motion. Took math through calculus as well, but was glad we didn’t use it much in the high school course. And these are not the “science RELATED fields” you so mysteriously talk about, but REAL science TOPICS. I had whole books about each of those topics and the books were quite thick and very expensive. I took courses in all those things as an undergraduate, and, since they needed science teachers badly in the early sixties, we were pushed into taking general chemistry, organic chemistry, zoology, botany, earth science, and geology courses as well. In that way we were minimally prepared to teach any of the high school sciences, and could pick up a stray section of any course, if needed. We would have some hope of staying ahead of the kids in the book if that happened, as it often did, particularly to new teachers. I found that I enjoyed teaching biology more than physics and concentrated on biology for my MA. I took courses in biochemistry, evolution, ecology and genetics along with more advanced zoology and botany classes. As I have said MANY times before. Frank (you don’t listen), I am not a “pure scientist” but a “science generalist”, as one needs to be to teach science in the high schools. I have more than the equivalent of a second MA in school administration, supervision, and curriculum.

Frank says, “You still have not provided any proof of your education or career”. What kind of proof do you want, Frank? I think that anyone who has followed my postings on PLD and heard me speak about things scientific or things school administration can judge for themselves whether what I say is any “proof” of anything.

IT”S YOUR TURN NOW, FRANK. Tell us about your education and the “course you taught in a science related field in a college”. Show us all that you deserve to be believed about global warming and any other topic in science more than I do. The whole PLD world is watching.

“Whack a mole, there is only one thing you appear to be able to whack and it aint (sic) called a mole where I come from” I’d respond to that if I knew what you were talking about, Frank—-you need to realize that you are the only one inside your head and we can’t figure out what you mean if you don’t express yourself more clearly..

Frank?
Frank????
FRANK??????!!!!!

IT’S YOUR TURN!
DID YOU DO YOUR HOMEWORK LAST NIGHT?

WE ARE ALL WAITING TO HEAR FROM YOU!!!!

Frank said to the ALL OMNIPOTENT RBT: Come on, tell us about your supposed degrees in “SCIENCE RELATED FIELDS”. I can see you got a BS in BS, just wondering which college it was from, maybe the McDonalds institute of burger flipping?

Bea-uti-mus Frank!

I noticed you got this clown trying his responses in caps now! Could you hear him this time? It must be AG in drag! I noticed ole Al gets a little agitated when asked about his scientific credentials! Seems to be a pattern here!

APN (:>

PS> Don’t ask him for REAL SCIENTIFIC facts, he gets real testy!

Making a last sweep through for the night. APN again shows his ignorance by saying
“I noticed you got this clown trying his responses in caps now!” APN is probably unaware of the fact that I am making fun of Frank with the caps, since Frank has done some memorable SHOUTING demonstrations with CAPS in the past—-brought on when I got him “agitated”. And Frank (before his disappearance), WAS getting a little agitated and “CAPPY” here, as evidenced by what you quoted.

And “Bea-uti-mus” ??????? What is that? A new language that you are developing for use with other fools? May I suggest you add another word to it, one that fits you nicely? As in “A-nal-ory-fus”?

RBT, I have not now, nor ever will disappear. I have explained before that I use all caps when integrating a response to a quote. Agitation is your goal not the effect. Others have eloquently explained your mental status. The words arrogant and pompous are fitting when describing your ranting. You fail in every way to respond to my questions, you fail in every respect when you refuse to refute my facts. The fact that my true facts dont fit your opinion is just too darned bad.

Sometimes my responses are slow because I dont sit here 24 hours a day watching for more of your nonsense. Many times it is just not worth the time it takes to respond to your obvious lame name calling and self aggrandizing remarks.

You have, on more than one occasion, said that nobody is taking my side in our argument. I would beg to differ, I have seen numerous people posting comments against your childish name calling and puffery.

Maybe I missed it, so I will dedicate several hours tomorrow looking through your responses to see if you had some kind of conscience attack and actually responded with facts.

You claim to have studied and received a bachelors and masters degree in some science related field, what field might that be?

You claim to have taught high school physics, what does that mean, I have taken the extremely limited high school physics and it was less than informative when it comes to real science.

You once said that you received courses in several physics type study, what types of physics did you learn that makes you think you are an expert in environmental physics?

What major or minor in college qualifies you to teach physics at high school?

I understand that in some systems a masters degree is required to be certified as a teacher, however, the masters degree does not, necessarily have to be in the field of study for which you teach.

For example, I can teach at college level because I have an MBA, now while that allows me to teach my branch of science, it is not specific to my bachelors degree.

You show your ignorance of many things on many levels.

You put forth that right wing people are incapable of rational thought.

You continuously claim that two parts of the brain that are related to emotional response are somehow connected to your personal ability to think rationally as opposed to emotionally.

You have put forth opinions that show that you believe that people that dont act or think right (according to your opinion) need to be treated with hate and disrespect.

By your stated theory, you should be horse whipped and publicly shamed for your abnormal thoughts and statements.

Do you have a double standard? Do you truly believe that it is just us right wing people that are beneath contempt and lacking in deserving respect?

AGW or more correctly AGCC (anthropomorphic global climate change) is wrong. It should be AAGW or more correctly AAGCC (anthropomorphic assisted global climate change).

I do not, and never have said that we dont contribute to greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. I simply object to the idea that we are the CAUSE of global climate change.

I have facts that show that our contribution is minimal, even so that does not change the fact that we are contributing. If you think you have facts that disprove my facts, then show them, dont just say your opinion is better than mine.

Something that you might want to consider. You are no longer teaching a class of little kids in high school, you have no inherent power or authority to which we must bow. Unlike in your classroom, your word is not the rule, here your word is only as good as your proof. And, teaching high school physics has no weight in proving your ability to understand complex physics.

I get the idea that you are stuck thinking inside some ancient box, you dont seem to be willing to think and accept new concepts. Lets try a thought experiment.

Black hole theory: The gravity in a black hole (quantum singularity) is so intense that light cannot escape.

What happens to the light?

Does it stop and fall back towards the black hole?

Does it bend around and head back to the black hole?

Does it maintain the speed of light during these maneuvers?

If the gravitational forces are so great that even light cannot escape, why is there evidence of plasma jets emitted from black holes 90 degrees from the spin axis?

Since gravity can alter the course of light (change its angular momentum) why cant it slow light down?

Is light a particle or a wave?

Is it a particle that acts like a wave?

Does gravity affect the wave property of light?

Is the red and blue shift of light due to a change in the wave or the speed of the light?

Experiments have shown that time is affected by gravity.

Since the speed of light is measured using time, is the speed of light different outside a gravity well?

I understand that your personal ideas for answering these questions is not going to be definitive, however, it will give some indication of your ability to perform rational thought exercises based on your current knowledge of physics.

Mr Kahn……… Beau-ti-mus!

I think you may have shut this egotistical clown up, finally!

Where did you go RBT??????

Did mean ole very educated and intelligent Mr. Kahn SPANK SPANK to hard???

LMAO!

APN

APN says to Mr Kahn……… Beau-ti-mus!, and Where did you go RBT??????
I’ve been on other threads and living real life, APN. And all I have to say to your meager offering is A-null-ory-fuss! Say goodnight, APN.

On to Frank. Frank is STILL laboring under the belief that anything he says must be true just because he says it. He throws a whole lot of OPINION out there and expects all to accept it as fact because HE wants to believe it is so. I have tried to point out this problem to Frank many times but his self-delusion is such that I’m making NO progress. It’s disheartening that a human being could be so irrational.
Frank demonstrates that bulldog like adherance to his non-truth with “The fact that my true facts dont (sic) fit your opinion is just too darned bad”.

And he feels he must defend himself and says, “You have,said that nobody is taking my side in our argument. I would beg to differ, I have seen numerous people posting comments against your childish name calling and puffery”
Sorry you are self-deluding again, Frank, it’s not about name-calling and puffery (your games) but about SCIENCE. I know it, you don’t—-NO ONE has ever supported your “science” over mine except me—-I HAVE told you when you have gotten it right, if you recall.

Frank is sounding like he’s suffering from senile dementia when he says, “You claim to have studied and received a bachelors and masters degree in some science related field, what field might that be?” I have laid that all out for you already, Frank, as well as answering your question about what was taught in high school physics. Do you not remember? I will apologize right now if it turns out that you are suffering fr4om dementia or Alzheimer’s.

“You claim to have taught high school physics, what does that mean, I have taken the extremely limited high school physics and it was less than informative when it comes to real science” More of the same—-a year of biology or chemistry or physics at the high school (with laboratory exercises in each) is not “real science”. What is it, LUNCH?

Franki comes out of his fog a bit and remembers when he says “You once said that you received courses in several physics type study, what types of physics did you learn that makes you think you are an expert in environmental physics?”

“What major or minor in college qualifies you to teach physics at high school?” How about a major in teaching physical science (physics specialization)with a minor in biology? Again, already explained elsewhere.

“I understand that in some systems a masters degree is required to be certified as a teacher, however, the masters degree does not, necessarily have to be in the field of study for which you teach”. One needs to be “certified” to teach a subject, Frank, and each state lists the courses and minimum number of semester hours one must take in a subject field to teach that subject.

“For example, I can teach at college level because I have an MBA, now while that allows me to teach my branch of science, it is not specific to my bachelors degree”.
I’m not sure what you’re talking about, Frank, but an MBA would not allow you teach any science course in VA—-business maybe, but not science. We were not allowed to hire teachers who weren’t certified in the subject.

“You show your ignorance of many things on many levels” Well thank you, Frank..

“You put forth that right wing people are incapable of rational thought” Not so, Frank. I put forth that people who are incapable of rational thought are incapable of rational thought—like you. On PLD, those things often go together—irrationality and EXTREME right wing people. And that’s not my fault—-it’s just an unfortunate truth..

“You continuously claim that two parts of the brain that are related to emotional response are somehow connected to your personal ability to think rationally as opposed to emotionally.” Frank still doesn’t know what he’s talking about regarding brain structure, political neuroscience, and political psychology. That’s because he refuses to read one of the best sources on recent brain research, The Republican Brain. Frank won’t read it because he says he “can tell from the title that it’s biased”.

“You have put forth opinions that show that you believe that people that dont (sic) act or think right (according to your opinion) need to be treated with hate and disrespect”
Not true, Frank—–I don’t talk about “hate” and only treat those who disrespect me and the truth the same way. And I give less than I get.

“By your stated theory, you should be horse whipped and publicly shamed for your abnormal thoughts and statements”. I’M abnormal, Frank? Delusional again.

“AGW or more correctly AGCC (anthropomorphic global climate change) is wrong. It should be AAGW or more correctly AAGCC (anthropomorphic assisted global climate change)” OK, Frank, whatever you say. Your “suggested” renaming will be accepted by no one in the field because it makes no scientific or linguistic sense, but don’t let that stop you—-you’ve persisted in spouti8ng “wrongness” before—why change now? .

“I do not, and never have said that we dont (sic)contribute to greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. I simply object to the idea that we are the CAUSE of global climate change”. I object to that idea too, because we are the cause of not climate change but AGW, which overlays the ongoing patterns of climate change that existed long before man arrived at the industrial age.

“I have facts that show that our contribution is minimal, even so that does not change the fact that we are contributing. If you think you have facts that disprove my facts, then show them, dont (sic)just say your opinion is better than mine”. Broken record, Frank, both my facts and my opinions are better than yours. Your facts are sometimes minimally “factual”, but you persist in misinterpreting them to us. You don’t really give us many facts anyway, Frank, just half-a**ed opinions that don’t add up. YOU need to give us facts that prove something, Frank—it is illogical to demand that I prove something wrong that is wrong on the face of it..

“Something that you might want to consider. You are no longer teaching a class of little kids in high school, you have no inherent power or authority to which we must bow. Unlike in your classroom, your word is not the rule, here your word is only as good as your proof. And, teaching high school physics has no weight in proving your ability to understand complex physics” Little kids? 18-year-olds? Many of whom went on to Ivy League colleges? You’re losing it, Frank..

And Frank in his infinite need to try to “win” some points actually says. “Lets try a thought experiment” and proposes to “quiz” me? Who are you going to get to “grade” the quiz, Frank? You? You have been reading “Black Holes for Dummies” and now you’re an expert?. LOL, Frank.

Frank says, “I understand that your personal ideas for answering these questions is not going to be definitive, however, it will give some indication of your ability to perform rational thought exercises based on your current knowledge of physics”
Sorry to disappoint you, Frank, but my answer IS going to be definitive. You are out of your mind if you think I’m going to play a silly game with you, especially when all your questions have NOTHING to do with the topic at hand, AGW. Why did you waste the time to study Black Holes rather than try to educate yourself on climate change and AGW? That topic has been on PLD before, is here before us right now, and will be back in the future. Lord love a duck!—-Say goodnight, Frank.

It sure is time consuming to respond to all your lies and half truths.

As per your usual density, you fail to identify the context of my statements in order to purport that my questions are redundant or a result of some mental disease. I prefaced my repeated questions with the acknowledgement that I might have missed you having already answered them.

When it comes to lack of facts and / or supporting evidence, you are king. Everything you post is based on opinion not fact based within your posts.

You have constantly berated the intelligence of right wingers. You always accuse anyone that disagrees with your opinions as being right wing fanatics. You started the name calling because you dont (and stop with the stupid (sic) when I leave out an apostrophe) like my truths.

18 year old’s (if they are still in high school) are still little kids. Whether or not they progressed into “Ivy League Schools” is not an indication of what they LEARNED in high school. I didnt go to an Ivy League school because I could not afford it.

I dont care what they do in VA, when it comes to teacher certification, I stated a FACT based on my credentials where I live. As a matter of fact, it was the university that informed me to obtain an MBA to achieve certification. My Bachelors degree coupled with 20 years of practical experience qualified me to teach the prescribed courses.

I am not saying that the world has to change AGW into AAGW, I am saying that the factual evidence supports the ASSISTED portion of the initials. I am sure you will falsely argue my point that AGW and AGCC are inter-related. AGW, by its nature causes effects that drive AGCC.

You constantly twist things and distort them to try and prove your superiority. You say I use facts but I do it incorrectly, without providing any examples. Is that because you cant?

With you, the subject is never about the stated topic, you wont allow it to be. You always twist it into your theory of “RBT is always right and anyone that disagrees is stupid”.

Books for dummies? A comment made by dummies?

Studying black holes instead of AGW? I am sorry RBT, did you put out a memo giving a mandate to humanity that studying AGW is more important than any other branch of physics? You made the statement that you are not a scientist just knowledgeable in general science, is that only valid for you? Did you object to my selecting quantum singularities as my thought exercise because of the topic or because you cant answer the questions? Do you dispute the premises of my exercise? Would you like me to pick a different branch of physics? You mentioned studying thermodynamics, is that a good subject for you. Can you explain why they say that entropy always increases. How about nuclear physics, can you explain the full life cycle of stars? What is the next element used in the fusion process after the hydrogen is exhausted? Since heavy elements are formed in stars, how many fusion cycles does it take to produce gold? If you put enough uranium together to achieve critical mass, why does it not suddenly create a fission reaction resulting in an atomic explosion? I have heard people ask a question about something that is impossible. What would happen if the moon’s orbit suddenly decayed and it crashed into the earth? Can you explain why the moon (as a complete entity) could not impact the earth due to orbital decay?

A thought experiment is not a quiz, and there is no grading. And in the case of my original experiment, your answers could not be definitive because remember “you are not a scientist”.

Frank Kahn says:

As per his usual “density”, Frank fails to get the point, or demonstrate much connection with reality. “18 year old’s are still little kids.”?

Frank rambles on but HAS YET TO ANSWER the question I posed to him. What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one? Nothing you say in general terms about certification, MBA’s, or credential has any credence until you describe the “prescribed courses” in detail. Do it or shut up about it.

This is such mindless, self-deluded horsepucky that I’m not even going to respond to it.
“I am not saying that the world has to change AGW into AAGW, I am saying that the factual evidence supports the ASSISTED portion of the initials. I am sure you will falsely argue my point that AGW and AGCC are inter-related. AGW, by its nature causes effects that drive AGCC”. I WILL say that Frank stands alone in the world of science, just like Darwin, Newton, and Einstein—-but NOT for the same reasons.

With me, Frank, the subject is ALWAYS about the stated topic, unless I waste time dealing with your stupidity —-and you’re not stupid because disagrees with me, you’re just plain stupid (or senile).

Franki shows his stupidity by contjnuing what he must think is a very clever tactic. Asking ME meaningless questions so that he can avoid owning up to his failures. I, however, am a lot smarter than Frank, and will continue to ignore his “thought experiment” horsepucky and say to him—-Get back on topic, Frank—-it’s AGW, not physics.

And of course, in his efforts to demonstrate knowledge, Frank again shows he lacks knowledge. Why does he keep shooting off his toes like this? For example, Frank asks, “If you put enough uranium together to achieve critical mass, why does it not suddenly create a fission reaction resulting in an atomic explosion?” He obviously doesn’t understand the absurdity of that.

Perhaps everyone has noticed Frank’s many apostrophe “fails” in this mindless posting?

dont (sic) didnt (sic) dont (sic) dont (sic) cant (sic) wont (sic) cant (sic) cant (sic)

And Frank wants to be taken seriously? A man in his 60′s who cant (sic) be grown up enough to stop with the dons and cants and wonts? I can repeat things too, Frank. How about——

What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one?

What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one?

What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one?

What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one?

What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one?

What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one?

What is that “course in a science-related field” that you brag about, Frank? How long are you going to evade that one?

Let’s hear it—-the course content, the textbook used, what courses you took to become qualified to teach it. I answered your questions, fair is fair—answer mine.

Yes, RBT, 18 is still a kid (child). Most CHILDREN are either already finished with high school, in the last FEW months of high school or have some reason for not finishing high school in a normal amount of time.

It was you that steered the discussion away from AGW and into physics in general.

Generalization about certification was simply an effort to enlighten you as to the incorrect assumption you made about criteria in all educational institutions.

My use of the phrase “science related field” was in direct response to your use of the same phrase when you were crowing about your qualifications. A “science related field” is an extreme generalization which carries no specific weight to a claim about knowledge of physics.

Even the lack of a degree in physics does not preclude a person from having significant knowledge of physics.

Your refusal to answer any of my questions does not indicate superior knowledge, it either points to a lack of ability or a stubborn refusal to address the subject.

Your statement that you have answered my questions so I need to answer yours is not correct. You have only provided word service to your claims of mental or educational superiority, not specific answers to questions about physics facts and theory.

You seem to believe that claiming to have taken some courses in college makes you more qualified to assert your opinion as truth. It all boils down to your opinion on who’s data and conclusions you want to agree with. Your opinion on which scientists are correct is no more valid than any other educated persons opinion on which is right.

If you feel that mans small contribution to greenhouse gasses has affected global warming and IS THEREFOR THE CAUSE of global warming, that is your right. If you feel that our contribution, however small, has accelerated GW by even a minute amount, constitutes a full causal relationship, that is also your right. If you desire to ignore any and all other possible contributing factors to GW so that you can say it is ALL MANS FAULT, that, again, is your right. However, your right to a theory or an opinion does not create the right to insist it is the truth and attack all others opinions as stupidity. Nor, does your constant harping on books for dummies create any form of proof of intellectual superiority.

Harping on my lazy lack of use of apostrophes in my contractions is meaningless and diversionary.

What qualitative analysis of a specific book name would, someone as myopic and opinionated as, you use to either approve or discredit it as factual? Why did you have to add the descriptive term “really big”, in reference to books?

When will you give facts and reasoning, instead of personal approval, to prove your superlative statement that IT IS AGW?

And, you should stop with the “Frank just does not get it” BS, the fact is that you don’t get it. Because of your arrogance, this is about YOU, not AGW or ME.

You even bragged about how you unjustly punish children to make a point and scare all of them into conforming to your personal idea of what is right. Are FEAR, PAIN and RIDICULE your only methods of TEACHING?

I am not avoiding answering your, diversionary attempting, question about my courses of study and instruction. I am simply waiting for you to begin to respond with relevant answers to my reasonable questions. When that happens, I will consider giving you the names of some reference materials I have used in forming my views and opinions.

Frank Kahn continues with his circular and illogical mental meanderings. I had to take a number of Psych courses, Frank, and the one titled “Child Psychology” dealt with the human beings typically found in elementary schools—-the true “kids”. The :”Adolescent Psychology” course dealt with the human beings typically found in high schools, and we often referred to them as “young adults”. I studied people like you in the “General Psychology” and “Abnormal Psychology” courses. Your continued mindless insistence on arguing points, almost ANY points, that are self-evidently WRONG to any normal person proves that your “psychology” is definitely abnormal.

“It was you that steered the discussion away from AGW and into physics in general” Go wherever your self-delusions lead you, Frank—-anyone who has read our exchanges knows that it was YOU who demanded all that info about physics and my background and the teaching of physics in the schools, and that I am the the one who has tried to keep you on topic—-(AGW, in case you’ve forgotten)..

No, Frank, your use of the phrase “science related field” was in reference to YOU claiming that you had some science expertise and had actually taught a course in a “science related field”. You are still evading the multiple requests to give us the details of that assertion. How much longer must we wait?

Frank almost gets it right when he says, “You seem to believe that claiming to have taken some courses in college makes you more qualified to assert your opinion as truth. It all boils down to your opinion on who’s data and conclusions you want to agree with. Your opinion on which scientists are correct is no more valid than any other educated persons opinion on which is right”. He is correct in the general sense, but we are talking the SPECIFIC case of Frank versus me and others here, and Frank, in spite of his self-delusional claims to the contrary, has demonstrated to all of us that his science knowledge and reasoning abilities are vastly inferior to mine and those of many others on PLD. Therefore, Frank’s OPINIONS (which is all they are), are less valid than the reasoned arguments supported by facts that we confront him with—-the TRUTHS. The application of simple logic should make that obvious to all—-but not, unfortunately, to the most dense and self-deluded like Frank..

Frank talks about “feel” and “right”? Lord love a duck, Frank! This is SCIENCE we’re talking about, and your NON-SCIENCE BASED OPINIONS are meaningless. You have no “right” to keep spouting horsepucky as if it were truth. Feelings are not a part of the scientific process. And I mainly attack YOUR OPINIONS as stupidity, because when it comes to science, YOU are stupid. I have attacked others who have been wrong in their science, but you are unique because of your blind stubbornness and desire to play Whack-a-Mole to the point of near-death.

My constant harping on books for dummies is an attempt to get you to understand the limits of your knowledge of things scientific. You have still not told us of ONE science book that you have read. It is obvious from your postings that you are a “looker upper” rather than a student, and one who is always behind the curve. The fact that I have read and understood MANY books on a wide variety of science topics is what makes my knowledge superior to yours, Frank. The fact that I am able to beat your brains in EVERY time we “talk” is the proof of my “intellectual superiority”. I’m not going to “be dumb” just to avoid hurting your feelings.

“Harping on my lazy lack of use of apostrophes in my contractions is meaningless and diversionary”, says Frank. .No, Frank—-it’s more than “lazy”—-it’s a deliberate, mindless and stubborn refusal to “give in” on your part. Nothing more—it’s pure childishness.

Frank has slipped off into senility land here. I’m not sure what he’s asking because of his problems with commas, but whatever it is, I will again remind him that HE is the one who rejects books on the basis of their “biased” titles. .”What qualitative analysis of a specific book name would, someone as myopic and opinionated as, you use to either approve or discredit it as factual? Why did you have to add the descriptive term “really big”, in reference to books?

“When am I going….?” I’ve been doing it all along with you, Frank, as have GALT and others—-the problem is that you don’t want to hear. Remember what you said about Skeptical Science? That says it all. I will again say “Frank just does not get it”, and because he doesn’t get it, he tries to make it about ME.

Frank “just didn’t get it” either when I talked about making an example out of someone to deter others. “unjustly punish”? “my personal idea of what is right”?. “FEAR, PAIN and RIDICULE?” I was trained, hired, and paid to “enforce” certain concepts of “right” in the schools, Frank—–they were not “personal” except that virtually all “normal” folks, both “kids” and adults recognize that—-not you though.

Frank makes a brilliant close to this mish-mosh of stupidity and illogic with “I am not avoiding answering your, diversionary attempting, question about my courses of study and instruction. I am simply waiting for you to begin to respond with relevant answers to my reasonable questions. When that happens, I will consider giving you the names of some reference materials I have used in forming my views and opinions”.

Yeah, yeah, Frank. Uh-huh! You’re not “avoiding”—-we can ALL see that! Why don’t you just give it up as you have before—-shut up, go lick your wounds, and come back on another thread in the future. I promise you two things. One, if you start spouting science horsepucky again, I will beat your brains out again. Two, if you refrain from spouting science horsepucky, I will work with you to help you increase your understanding of things science.

Your BS really is impossible to stop isnt it. YOU WERE THE FIRST TO REFERENCE YOUR SUPPOSED EDUCATION AS BEING IN SCIENCE RELATED FIELDS.

STUPID IS WHAT I WOULD NOT CALL YOU, BECAUSE I AM MORE OF AN ADULT THAN YOU.

YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN ANY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER IN ANY POST HERE.

YOUR OPINIONS ARE MORONIC (WHICH IS SEVERAL STEPS BELOW STUPID).

ADOLESCENT IS A RATHER RECENT MADE UP TERM THAT IS USED BETWEEN PUBERTY AND THE AGE OF CONSENT, SOMETIMES THE LITTLE KIDDIES LIKE TO SAY THEY ARE TWEENS. Depending on the source of your definition (yours of which I am unable to find anywhere in english dictionaries) is generally the age from birth to puberty. Now maybe you are a special case, but most children dont suddenly hit puberty at 8 or 9 years old. Most boys are actually closer to their teens when that happens. By the accepted definitions of child and adolescent, they are all children since adulthood occurs at the end of adolescence.

It is not delusional to state a fact documented on this site in your own words. You were the one to start crowing about your superior training and knowledge in physics not me.

You can not truthfully and honestly present any occurance of me using incorrect scientific information on this blog site in any post for any topic. So again you are just lying out your a$$.

If you are incapable of putting forth a cogent argument then why don yo just go suck your thumb in your obvious alzheimers mental state.

p.s. a sociopath like yourself would not be capable of recognizing abnormal psychological evidence.

I reject your book because it has basic flaws in its original assumptions and the methodology of testing a specific group for a biased result.

You couldn’t beat my brains out if you had me tied to a tree, drugged and was swinging a 20 pound sledge hammer.

your famous saying horse puckey, it is road apples that you are dropping.

I have waited for months to hear you give even one piece of science.

You are wrong, it is not you tracking me, I am hunting your sorry demented a$$, and every time you open that sewer gate below your nose, I will be here to remind you of just how obnoxious and repulsive it is.

I guess, now you want us to bow down and kiss your merde de toro encursted shoes since you are now also an expert in psychology?

When you tortured those poor little children in high school, and made them scream so loud it scared the crap out of the rest, did it give you a sense of power? Did it make you feel like a man to destroy a kids life just because he/she did not see the world as the mighty god RBT does?

If you were teaching my kids, I would have you horse whipped and in prison for your arrogant inhumane treatment of them. Those children deserve more respect than you will ever earn in this or any life.

But, since you are just as demented as Obama, and there is as yet no cure for your mental disease, we will just have to put up with your moronic ranting till you die. Gee, at your age, it will be very sooon.

The moon could never crash into the earth as a single object because the gravitational tidal forces would rip it apart long before contact. If you want the exact equation for two bodies gravitational tidal forces when they are of different mass, I can provide it and explain the distance at which the tidal forces will start ripping the smaller massed obect apart. This tidal effect does not apply if the smaller object is approaching at a significant velocity.

critical mass of U-235 (the fisile isotope of uranium) would not cause an explosion due to the fact that is would simpley super heat and do a great immitation of a core meltdown.

High school physics is too rudimentary to be considered deep serious science.

I took chemistry in high school, but I would not say that makes me knowledgeable about chemistry as a science.

Many teachers, of primary and secondary shools, dont have a good grasp of the subject matter they are supposed to teach. Actually, no pressure to perform, you are the reisdent expert, compared to the students.

Frank Kahn stays up late to continue to spout his nonsense. Frank has lost the argument(s) again but is too proud and/or ignorant to recognize that. Frank is “whistling in the dark” here on a thread that no one is visiting much anymore. Frank is working hard to prove himself to be more delusional and demented with every posing. I will assist Frank in that effort, which seems to be his sole mission on PLD anymore. I will do that by mostly just “quoting” some of his comments and adding some thoughts of my own. (a note to APN—-Frank is agitated and SHOUTING at us).

“STUPID IS WHAT I WOULD NOT CALL YOU, BECAUSE I AM MORE OF AN ADULT THAN YOU”.

“YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN ANY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER IN ANY POST HERE”

YOUR OPINIONS ARE MORONIC (WHICH IS SEVERAL STEPS BELOW STUPID).
Several steps???—- please list the steps and give sources!

“ADOLESCENT IS A RATHER RECENT MADE UP TERM THAT IS USED BETWEEN PUBERTY AND THE AGE OF CONSENT, SOMETIMES THE LITTLE KIDDIES LIKE TO SAY THEY ARE TWEENS”
TWEENS? As in Tweenkies”? They stopped making those, Frank! And what is “made up” about it? Aren’t all words “made up”?

“Depending on the source of your definition (yours of which I am unable to find anywhere in english (sic) dictionaries”
Try Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, Frank. Page 16 in my 1973 edition. (and 40 years is not very “recent”, is it?—-the word HAS been around a while)

“You can not truthfully and honestly present any occurance of me using incorrect scientific information on this blog site in any post for any topic. So again you are just lying out your a$$”
Good one, Frank—-you win the “intelligent and rational debater of the day” award for that piece of mindlessness.

“If you are incapable of putting forth a cogent argument then why don yo just go suck your thumb in your obvious alzheimers mental state”.
Runnerup for the above award!

“p.s. a sociopath like yourself would not be capable of recognizing abnormal psychological evidence.”
Frank is now a practicing psychiatrist, specializing in long-range diagnosis!

“I reject your book because it has basic flaws in its original assumptions and the methodology of testing a specific group for a biased result”.
Remember, folks, Frank has ALREADY rejected the book because HE COULD TELL FROM THE TITLE THAT IT WAS BIASED. Since he didn’t read it, how can he say what he just said about its contents? Frank is squirming.

Frank is also getting frantic with this stream of nonsense messages, one after the other.

“You couldn’t beat my brains out if you had me tied to a tree, drugged and was swinging a 20 pound sledge hammer”.
Wouldn’t need to, Frank—if I blew in your ear, your “brains” would come out the other ear and disappear like a dandelion seed in a hurricane.

“your famous saying horse puckey, it is road apples that you are dropping”
Clever!.

“I have waited for months to hear you give even one piece of science”.
True, but you need to have an open mind and be willing to LISTEN, Frank. And there’s the additional complication that y9ou don’t even know enough “science” to recognize it.

“You are wrong, it is not you tracking me, I am hunting your sorry demented a$$, and every time you open that sewer gate below your nose, I will be here to remind you of just how obnoxious and repulsive it is”
Demented and delusional..

“I guess, now you want us to bow down and kiss your merde de toro encursted shoes since you are now also an expert in psychology?”
Lord love a duck, Frank! Where did you ever get “merde de toro encursted (sic)” from? That moron APN gave it to you? Mr. A-nal-ory-fuss himself?

“If you were teaching my kids, I would have you horse whipped and in prison for your arrogant inhumane treatment of them. Those children deserve more respect than you will ever earn in this or any life”
Frank is now an expert on “how to run a high school” and “modern penology”. Is there ANYTHING Frank isn’t an expert on?

“But, since you are just as demented as Obama, and there is as yet no cure for your mental disease, we will just have to put up with your moronic ranting till you die. Gee, at your age, it will be very sooon”
Yep, demented and delusional is it—-I hope Frank is not a VOODOO expert, although I AM feeling these sharp little pains in my lower back???? Nah, just old age there. By the way, Frank, it’s really NOT nice to wish death on folks—-I wouldn’t do that to you, you know. I hope you live long and prosper—-I am positive that you have already lived long enough to be a “burden to your children”, as the old joke goes. IN fact, you have probably been a burden to them since they were “early adolescents”.

“The moon could never crash into the earth as a single object because the gravitational tidal forces would rip it apart long before contact. If you want the exact equation for two bodies gravitational tidal forces when they are of different mass, I can provide it and explain the distance at which the tidal forces will start ripping the smaller massed obect (sic) apart. This tidal effect does not apply if the smaller object is approaching at a significant velocity.”
Uh, Frank? Frank?? FRANK!!! Get back on topic—-it’s AGW!!!!! We don’t care what you looked up in “Displaying Dumbness to the World for Dummies”.

“critical mass of U-235 (the fisile (sic) isotope of uranium) would not cause an explosion due to the fact that is would simpley (sic) super heat and do a great immitation (sic) of a core meltdown”
One must always beware of “imitation” core meltdowns, Frank. They are so disappointing when compared to the real thing. Like the “core meltdown Frank’s brain has been undergoing for some time? Now that’s approaching the spectacular!

“High school physics is too rudimentary to be considered deep serious science”.
Right, Frank, it’s a SHALLOW serious science! How perceptive of you.

“I took chemistry in high school, but I would not say that makes me knowledgeable about chemistry as a science”. OOGAH-OOGAH-OOGAH! DIVE-DIVE-DIVE! Frank has spoken TRUTH for a change—-we are diving to escape the tsunami of self-awareness that may now come flooding out of Frank’s feeble brain. It may even be only a couple of centimeters deep, but we must be cautious..

Many teachers, of primary and secondary shools (sic), dont (sic) have a good grasp of the subject matter they are supposed to teach. Actually, no pressure to perform, you are the reisdent (sic) expert, compared to the students.
Frank finhally falls asleep at the keyboard, leaving some unfinished thought dangling. But wait, all of Frank’s thoughts are unfinished and dangling! Hmmmmmm.

Here, again, we must go through a long winded ad hominem attack posted by RBT. He uses these because he has not facts or proof of his inane arguments.

I apologize to the readers of this site for the size of my response.

RBT (SIC) he is afraid to let anyone know his real name.

“Frank Kahn stays up late to continue to spout his nonsense. Frank has lost the argument(s) again but is too proud and/or ignorant to recognize that. Frank is “whistling in the dark” here on a thread that no one is visiting much anymore. Frank is working hard to prove himself to be more delusional and demented with every posing. I will assist Frank in that effort, which seems to be his sole mission on PLD anymore. I will do that by mostly just “quoting” some of his comments and adding some thoughts of my own. (a note to APN—-Frank is agitated and SHOUTING at us).”

Several problems with this first section. I am not SHOUTING at you (and dont use the word US in reference to my responses to YOU). Pride and / or Ignorance has nothing to do with continuing. You still dont respond so I keep at you, and will till you do. Delusional and Demented are words that you use without knowing their meanings. Am I delusional for thinking that there is a possibility that you might suddenly answer intelligently? I find it strange that you would call this a dead thread that hardly anyone visits anymore. I keep getting lots of notices of new postings here. Is that just an example of proof by bald assertion?

“STUPID IS WHAT I WOULD NOT CALL YOU, BECAUSE I AM MORE OF AN ADULT THAN YOU”.

“YOU HAVE NOT GIVEN ANY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER IN ANY POST HERE”

YOUR OPINIONS ARE MORONIC (WHICH IS SEVERAL STEPS BELOW STUPID).
Several steps???—- please list the steps and give sources!”

Nit picking on my choice of words? Should I have just said “even more severe than simply stupid”?

“ADOLESCENT IS A RATHER RECENT MADE UP TERM THAT IS USED BETWEEN PUBERTY AND THE AGE OF CONSENT, SOMETIMES THE LITTLE KIDDIES LIKE TO SAY THEY ARE TWEENS”
TWEENS? As in Tweenkies”? They stopped making those, Frank! And what is “made up” about it? Aren’t all words “made up”?”

More absurdity? If you are so physically removed from cultural reality that you dont know of or recognize the term tween, it might be impossible to address this issue. It does exist in the dictionary.

“Tween is a word that typically refers to a person who is between the ages of 9 to 12 years old (although some say the range is 8 to 12, 9 to 14, or 9 to 13, or 11 and 12), in grades 5-7 or 4-8. The term is often described in popular media as referring to a pre-adolescent (usually female) who is at the “in-between” stage in their development when they are considered “too old for toys, too young for boys”. The “tween” stage usually ends with the onset of puberty, though this may vary.”

Yes, all words are made up at some point in history, the key portion of the phrase was actually RECENTLY. It use is fairly recent and its definition is almost identical to youth.

“Depending on the source of your definition (yours of which I am unable to find anywhere in english (sic) dictionaries”
Try Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, Frank. Page 16 in my 1973 edition. (and 40 years is not very “recent”, is it?—-the word HAS been around a while)”

Since you quote Webster’s I have copied a series of definitions from them for investigating your claim of child being between the age of 0 and 8.

“Definition of CHILD
1
a : an unborn or recently born person
b dialect : a female infant
2
a : a young person especially between infancy and youth
b : a childlike or childish person
c : a person not yet of age

Definition of INFANT
1
: a child in the first period of life
2
: a person who is not of full age : minor

Definition of YOUTH
1
a : the time of life when one is young; especially : the period between childhood and maturity
b : the early period of existence, growth, or development
2
a : a young person; especially : a young male between adolescence and maturity
b : young persons or creatures —usually plural in construction ”

At best you might use the first definition under child in general terms, however, if you continue following the steps of human development in their definitions it all gets blurred, since all of them have until adulthood as one of the limiting factors. And by the way english dictionaries is not misspelled or incorrect, except for not capitalization of the word English.

“You can not truthfully and honestly present any occurance of me using incorrect scientific information on this blog site in any post for any topic. So again you are just lying out your a$$”
Good one, Frank—-you win the “intelligent and rational debater of the day” award for that piece of mindlessness.”

Ad hominem attack and proof by bald assertion. It is also an implied lie. There is nothing that can be defined as mindless about my statement.

“If you are incapable of putting forth a cogent argument then why don yo just go suck your thumb in your obvious alzheimers mental state”.
Runnerup for the above award!”

Again, ad hominem attack by association. You have failed to put forth any cogent arguments in response to my posts. The conclusion that it might be due to Alzheimer disease is not mindless, just trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.

“p.s. a sociopath like yourself would not be capable of recognizing abnormal psychological evidence.”
Frank is now a practicing psychiatrist, specializing in long-range diagnosis!”

Your posting, to date, show a strong tendency towards the psychological condition called sociopath. If a degree in psychology was a requirement, your claims that I exhibit an abnormal psychology would be in the same category as mine.

“I reject your book because it has basic flaws in its original assumptions and the methodology of testing a specific group for a biased result”.
Remember, folks, Frank has ALREADY rejected the book because HE COULD TELL FROM THE TITLE THAT IT WAS BIASED. Since he didn’t read it, how can he say what he just said about its contents? Frank is squirming.”

No SQUIRMING, I explained my reasons. Never judge a book by its cover? Not always true, sometimes the cover is quite informative as to the contents within. I have taken the time to peruse the quasi-scientific offerings. The content of the book supports my original statement about the title indicating bias in the research.

“Frank is also getting frantic with this stream of nonsense messages, one after the other.”

A stream of responses is often required when the person you respond to insists on extremely long and arduous diatribes.

“You couldn’t beat my brains out if you had me tied to a tree, drugged and was swinging a 20 pound sledge hammer”.
Wouldn’t need to, Frank—if I blew in your ear, your “brains” would come out the other ear and disappear like a dandelion seed in a hurricane.”

Not sure where to put this logical fallacy and supercilious statement. The fact is that, if you got your ancient, demented personage close to me and attempted to blow in my ear, I would react violently and cause you severe pain. I am not into homosexual advances like you propose here.

“your famous saying horse puckey, it is road apples that you are dropping”
Clever!.

“I have waited for months to hear you give even one piece of science”.
True, but you need to have an open mind and be willing to LISTEN, Frank. And there’s the additional complication that y9ou don’t even know enough “science” to recognize it.”

Gross overstatement, in implication, that something you have attempted to say is actually scientific. Also, your response appears to be a form of psychological projection, you cant accept your own close mindedness and lack of scientific knowledge so you project it to others.

“You are wrong, it is not you tracking me, I am hunting your sorry demented a$$, and every time you open that sewer gate below your nose, I will be here to remind you of just how obnoxious and repulsive it is”
Demented and delusional..”

Another psychological analysis without credentials? My statement is factual, I am dedicated to watching you, to keep reminding you of the mistakes and personal attacks you perpetrate on others.

“I guess, now you want us to bow down and kiss your merde de toro encursted shoes since you are now also an expert in psychology?”
Lord love a duck, Frank! Where did you ever get “merde de toro encursted (sic)” from? That moron APN gave it to you? Mr. A-nal-ory-fuss himself?

Again dragging APN into this with an ad hominem attack. Also, you seem to consider yourself a grammar expert and spelling monitor. Encursted was obviously a typo, the u and r are transposed. And for your reading pleasure, if you are capable of understanding it, here is an explanation of the term you inquired about.

E ‘italiano, ho scritto male merda e la L non è stato digitato per la della parola. significa merda del toro. Mi dispiace se non si capisce altre lingue.

“If you were teaching my kids, I would have you horse whipped and in prison for your arrogant inhumane treatment of them. Those children deserve more respect than you will ever earn in this or any life”
Frank is now an expert on “how to run a high school” and “modern penology”. Is there ANYTHING Frank isn’t an expert on?”

A person does not have to be an expert on running a high school to know when heavy handed methods, that dole out non-proportional punishment, are wrong. And, I am sure that most here will recognize your Freudian slip when you make reference to penology in relationship to running a high school. Just so you will know, for future reference, a high school is not a penal institution.

“Definition of PENOLOGY
: a branch of criminology dealing with prison management and the treatment of offenders ”

Definition quoted from Websters Dictionary.

“But, since you are just as demented as Obama, and there is as yet no cure for your mental disease, we will just have to put up with your moronic ranting till you die. Gee, at your age, it will be very sooon”
Yep, demented and delusional is it—-I hope Frank is not a VOODOO expert, although I AM feeling these sharp little pains in my lower back???? Nah, just old age there. By the way, Frank, it’s really NOT nice to wish death on folks—-I wouldn’t do that to you, you know. I hope you live long and prosper—-I am positive that you have already lived long enough to be a “burden to your children”, as the old joke goes. IN fact, you have probably been a burden to them since they were “early adolescents”.”

Again, you incorrectly use the terms demented and delusional, these words do not apply to my statement. I can sympathize with your reading comprehension here, but where, in my statement, did I say I wish death on you? I only pointed out that, since you are now 72, you will not live much longer. This is a statistical observation, given the normal life expectancy for a male citizen of this country. As to being a burden, which person is more burdensome, someone that insists their way is the only way, or someone that tries to integrate all possibilities into their life views? Someone that insists there is only one true opinion, or someone that asks questions about the accuracy of that opinion? Someone that claims their opinion is absolutely correct, or someone that admits it is just their educated opinion?

“The moon could never crash into the earth as a single object because the gravitational tidal forces would rip it apart long before contact. If you want the exact equation for two bodies gravitational tidal forces when they are of different mass, I can provide it and explain the distance at which the tidal forces will start ripping the smaller massed obect (sic) apart. This tidal effect does not apply if the smaller object is approaching at a significant velocity.”
Uh, Frank? Frank?? FRANK!!! Get back on topic—-it’s AGW!!!!! We don’t care what you looked up in “Displaying Dumbness to the World for Dummies”.”

Ad hominem attack and an attempt to discredit by absurdity. Failure to comprehend the thread our current debate. You failed to participate in the thought experiment. I concluded that you did not have sufficient information to formulate a response, so I provided the correct answer to one of the questions.

“critical mass of U-235 (the fisile (sic) isotope of uranium) would not cause an explosion due to the fact that is would simpley (sic) super heat and do a great immitation (sic) of a core meltdown”
One must always beware of “imitation” core meltdowns, Frank. They are so disappointing when compared to the real thing. Like the “core meltdown Frank’s brain has been undergoing for some time? Now that’s approaching the spectacular!”

Again with the spelling police (sic) crap? Did you not understand the reason for saying imitation? A core meltdown refers to what happens in a nuclear reactor when there is a critical malfunction with the cores coolant. That results in a runaway reaction that causes the temperature to go to the extremes and, as in the case of Chernobyl, the temperature of the fissile material burns its way through the floor of the containment structure and even down into the Earth.

“High school physics is too rudimentary to be considered deep serious science”.
Right, Frank, it’s a SHALLOW serious science! How perceptive of you.”

another ad hominem attack and use of absurdity. The opposite of “deep serious science” is not “shallow serious science”, the opposite is simple science, or as you would say “science for dummies”.

“I took chemistry in high school, but I would not say that makes me knowledgeable about chemistry as a science”. OOGAH-OOGAH-OOGAH! DIVE-DIVE-DIVE! Frank has spoken TRUTH for a change—-we are diving to escape the tsunami of self-awareness that may now come flooding out of Frank’s feeble brain. It may even be only a couple of centimeters deep, but we must be cautious..”

More ad hominem attacks and extreme use of absurdity in pushing your personal agenda. It is you who maintains that I claim to be an expert in these fields, not me. Unlike you, I freely admit that I am not an EXPERT, I only put forth the idea that you aren’t either. It now becomes apparent that you think that anyone who disagrees with you must be an expert, since nothing less could possibly be acceptable.

“Many teachers, of primary and secondary shools (sic), dont (sic) have a good grasp of the subject matter they are supposed to teach. Actually, no pressure to perform, you are the reisdent (sic) expert, compared to the students.
Frank finhally(sic)(sic)(sic) falls asleep at the keyboard, leaving some unfinished thought(sic) dangling. But wait, all of Frank’s thoughts are unfinished and dangling! Hmmmmmm.”"

ad hock ergo proctor hock? Since I did not give an example to support my statement, are you saying that this is always true? I might say that, at least I have thoughts, as opposed to your drivel. If I don’t continue, and finish with my ideas, it is only because you fail to respond in any logical and consistent manner. You ALWAYS try to derail the conversation by diverting everything into insults. My statement about teachers is factual, if you want examples you should ask for them.

Frank Kahn says, “I apologize to the readers of this site for the size of my response”, and then proceeds to give us a 6+ page “response”? (that says very little, to boot). Lord love a duck, Frank!—-you are deluded. Why are you responding? Do you think anyone is listening? If they are, it’s because they are fascinated by your dogged persistence, just as I am.

RBT (SIC) “he is afraid to let anyone know his real name”. Dont (sic) know the reason for the (sic) after RBT, but if Frank is trying to grow a sense of humor, I wont (sic) be the one to discourage him. And is Frank Kahn his real name? Frank is a fool for posting his real name on a site like PLD, just as Nadzi was.

“Several problems with this first section. I am not SHOUTING at you (and dont (sic) use the word US in reference to my responses to YOU)”. Frank seems to be unaware of the fact that he is speaking to ALL of US visitors on PLD—-Frank’s words are there (unfortunately and embarrassingly) for all the WORLD to to see—-WE are US..

“Nit picking on my choice of words? Should I have just said “even more severe than simply stupid”?, asks Frank. No, Frank, that’s just as dumb—you should have just said nothing.

Frank talks about absurdity and my using the word “Tweenkies” to make fun of his foolishness. Right after he talks about “adolescent” being a “made up word” and “recent”? And cites something he has looked up in “How to stupidly waste time and miss the point for Dummies”? LMAO, Frank.

Here’s something Frank can find if he googles “origins of the word adolescent”.
“The word adolescence, which came into English in the 15th century, has a Latin origin, and Aristotle was an early observer who recognized adolescence as a distinct phase of life” Sounds kind of “non-recent” to me—-wasn’t Aristotle even an “ancient”?

Of course, since RBT “discovered” this and pointed it out to Frank, it CAN’T be true, and Frank will brilliantly refute it. Cant (sic) wait to see that.

Frank? Frank???!! FRANK!!!!! You’re wandering off again with all this defining irrelevant words crap—-I don’t need to see any definitions, YOU do—-you’re the one who is confused. The word we’re talking about is ADOLESCENT, and we’re talking about it because you said it was “made up”. FOCUS, Frank!

Frank says, among other things, “There is nothing that can be defined as mindless about my statement(s)”, proving how mindless he is to even think that, never mind commit it to writing. Same goes for his practicing psychiatry without any training, a license, or a brain.

“No SQUIRMING”, says Frank, over his book selection/rejection “behaviors”. I will repeat myself—-that’s just about all Frank does, so I guess I can get away with it too.
“Remember, folks, Frank has ALREADY rejected the book because HE COULD TELL FROM THE TITLE THAT IT WAS BIASED. Since he didn’t read it, how can he say what he just said about its contents? Frank is squirming.”

Frank promptly squirms for us and evades some more, saying, “Never judge a book by its cover? Not always true, sometimes the cover is quite informative as to the contents within”. Proves my point.

Frank talks about “extremely long and arduous diatribes”. Priceless!

“The fact is that, if you got your ancient, demented personage close to me and attempted to blow in my ear, I would react violently and cause you severe pain. I am not into homosexual advances like you propose here”.

A “homosexual advance? LMAO I know you’re not much into metaphor, Frank, but what I said was the same as saying “Frank’s brain is so small, so lightweight, and so detached in that “empty” head of his that a puff of air in one ear would dislodge it and it would go out the other ear, disappearing forever”. And I am laughing loudly at the “ancient demented personage” qualifier Frank throws in. Of course, since Frank isn’t into irony any more than he is into metaphor, he doesn’t realize the implication of that—-One can read into that the idea that Frank WOULD perhaps welcome such “advances” if they came from a “young and non-demented personage”. Is Frank “in the closet”? Does he prefer young guys? Is this a “peek out” for Frank?

And I love the mindless “react violently and cause you severe pain” chest-thumping, Frank. From reading your stuff, let me tell you that I am NOT of the opinion that I should be afraid in the least of anything you might do without a gun in your hand. The thought that you may have access to guns IS scary, however.

Where IS APN, anyway. Although he has his problems, he appears to be far smarter and WAY less self-deluded than Frank. Maybe he doesn’t want to follow you, Frank?—-down that road to self-destruction of any and all credibility? Good move, APN.

I asked, “Frank is now an expert on “how to run a high school” and “modern penology”. Is there ANYTHING Frank isn’t an expert on?” Frank again displays his major “expertise fail” for us, the inability to read and comprehend the English language (followed by a long-winded diatribe that is built on that lack of understanding). Frank, YOU made the reference to penology, when you said I should be in prison. I said nothing about it in relation to running a high school.

Frank then proceeds to give a a “live lesson” in what the meaning of demented and delusional is. Yes, I am quite sure that Frank HAS lived long enough to be a SEVERE burden to his children. (and I love the mention of “educated opinion”—-maybe Frank will have one some day?—-I hope so—-those of us that have them and see them coming from others find them quite enjoyable)

Again, as far as the moon and core meltdowns? I will yet again repeat myself, by saying,

Uh, Frank? Frank?? FRANK!!! Get back on topic—-it’s AGW!!!!! We don’t care what you looked up in “Displaying Dumbness to the World for Dummies”. Although I DO dearly love the idea of “imitation” core meltdowns, Frank, and I thank you for bringing it up again—-making us laugh once again. And thanks again for giving us some “facts” you gathered from “Nuclear Reactors for Dummies”—too bad you didn’t really understand what you read—-but I guess it’s understandable—you’re just a “looker upper”.

Frank, it’s English lesson time again—The opposite of “simple science“ is “complex science”, and “deepness” is for oceans. All science is serious, too bad you’re not.

I only use “extreme absurdity” when dealing with people whose thinking and statements are extremely absurd, Frank. It’s your problem, not mine.

ad hock ergo proctor hock? ad HOCK ergo PROCTOR HOCK? Lord love a demented and deluded duck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did Frank mean to say “ad hoc ergo propter hoc”? BWAAAAA-HAHAHAHAHAHA! Yet another attempt at “intellectualism” fails spectacularly. Give it up, Frank

RBT (SIC), the sic is because it is not yours.

The length of my responses is predicated on the length of your diatribes. I laugh hysterically at your simple minded attempts at disproving that which is obvious.

proctor hock is you pulling your sewer nonsense out of your a$$.

This subject has not been about your imaginary AGW, for more than 5 days. It is and always will be about your stupidity and moronic insanity, attempting to prove something by saying it over and over. Where is your science? Where is your Logic? Where is your reasoning? Aint here cuz it aint there.

you want to make fun of spelling and grammar? Really, with all your mistakes that I let pass?

Do you know the difference between “lies formed in the mind of RBT as opposed to truth”?

Come on butthead, show me your magnificent intellect, show me that you can make one post that is not based solely on your incessant name calling and self aggrandizing.

For you information you used penology in the same statement as you referred to running a high school.

And yes, mr. wonderful, I do own and use guns. It is not necessary to use them to combat a simple minded moron like you.

From your posts, with the current anti-gun craze in this country, you will lose your ability to own and possess them if anyone analyzes your psychotic mental tendencies.

I am also against murdering unborn babies, but in your case maybe abortion is not such a bad idea.

So, you are also chicken $hit. Cant use your real name because someone will see your mental problems and come put you away? Not a real man? Have to hide your identity so nobody that knows you will know the absurd things you claim?

I am posting a quote from your last post that shows all your ignorance, insanity, self-delusional, lying, hateful bull$hit in one single move.

THE UNNAMED FRIGHTENED LITTLE PERSON SAID

“Frank Kahn says, “I apologize to the readers of this site for the size of my response”, and then proceeds to give us a 6+ page “response”? (that says very little, to boot). Lord love a duck, Frank!—-you are deluded. Why are you responding? Do you think anyone is listening? If they are, it’s because they are fascinated by your dogged persistence, just as I am.

RBT (SIC) “he is afraid to let anyone know his real name”. Dont (sic) know the reason for the (sic) after RBT, but if Frank is trying to grow a sense of humor, I wont (sic) be the one to discourage him. And is Frank Kahn his real name? Frank is a fool for posting his real name on a site like PLD, just as Nadzi was.

“Several problems with this first section. I am not SHOUTING at you (and dont (sic) use the word US in reference to my responses to YOU)”. Frank seems to be unaware of the fact that he is speaking to ALL of US visitors on PLD—-Frank’s words are there (unfortunately and embarrassingly) for all the WORLD to to see—-WE are US..

“Nit picking on my choice of words? Should I have just said “even more severe than simply stupid”?, asks Frank. No, Frank, that’s just as dumb—you should have just said nothing.

Frank talks about absurdity and my using the word “Tweenkies” to make fun of his foolishness. Right after he talks about “adolescent” being a “made up word” and “recent”? And cites something he has looked up in “How to stupidly waste time and miss the point for Dummies”? LMAO, Frank.

Here’s something Frank can find if he googles “origins of the word adolescent”.
“The word adolescence, which came into English in the 15th century, has a Latin origin, and Aristotle was an early observer who recognized adolescence as a distinct phase of life” Sounds kind of “non-recent” to me—-wasn’t Aristotle even an “ancient”?

Of course, since RBT “discovered” this and pointed it out to Frank, it CAN’T be true, and Frank will brilliantly refute it. Cant (sic) wait to see that.

Frank? Frank???!! FRANK!!!!! You’re wandering off again with all this defining irrelevant words crap—-I don’t need to see any definitions, YOU do—-you’re the one who is confused. The word we’re talking about is ADOLESCENT, and we’re talking about it because you said it was “made up”. FOCUS, Frank!

Frank says, among other things, “There is nothing that can be defined as mindless about my statement(s)”, proving how mindless he is to even think that, never mind commit it to writing. Same goes for his practicing psychiatry without any training, a license, or a brain.

“No SQUIRMING”, says Frank, over his book selection/rejection “behaviors”. I will repeat myself—-that’s just about all Frank does, so I guess I can get away with it too.
“Remember, folks, Frank has ALREADY rejected the book because HE COULD TELL FROM THE TITLE THAT IT WAS BIASED. Since he didn’t read it, how can he say what he just said about its contents? Frank is squirming.”

Frank promptly squirms for us and evades some more, saying, “Never judge a book by its cover? Not always true, sometimes the cover is quite informative as to the contents within”. Proves my point.

Frank talks about “extremely long and arduous diatribes”. Priceless!

“The fact is that, if you got your ancient, demented personage close to me and attempted to blow in my ear, I would react violently and cause you severe pain. I am not into homosexual advances like you propose here”.

A “homosexual advance? LMAO I know you’re not much into metaphor, Frank, but what I said was the same as saying “Frank’s brain is so small, so lightweight, and so detached in that “empty” head of his that a puff of air in one ear would dislodge it and it would go out the other ear, disappearing forever”. And I am laughing loudly at the “ancient demented personage” qualifier Frank throws in. Of course, since Frank isn’t into irony any more than he is into metaphor, he doesn’t realize the implication of that—-One can read into that the idea that Frank WOULD perhaps welcome such “advances” if they came from a “young and non-demented personage”. Is Frank “in the closet”? Does he prefer young guys? Is this a “peek out” for Frank?

And I love the mindless “react violently and cause you severe pain” chest-thumping, Frank. From reading your stuff, let me tell you that I am NOT of the opinion that I should be afraid in the least of anything you might do without a gun in your hand. The thought that you may have access to guns IS scary, however.

Where IS APN, anyway. Although he has his problems, he appears to be far smarter and WAY less self-deluded than Frank. Maybe he doesn’t want to follow you, Frank?—-down that road to self-destruction of any and all credibility? Good move, APN.

I asked, “Frank is now an expert on “how to run a high school” and “modern penology”. Is there ANYTHING Frank isn’t an expert on?” Frank again displays his major “expertise fail” for us, the inability to read and comprehend the English language (followed by a long-winded diatribe that is built on that lack of understanding). Frank, YOU made the reference to penology, when you said I should be in prison. I said nothing about it in relation to running a high school.

Frank then proceeds to give a a “live lesson” in what the meaning of demented and delusional is. Yes, I am quite sure that Frank HAS lived long enough to be a SEVERE burden to his children. (and I love the mention of “educated opinion”—-maybe Frank will have one some day?—-I hope so—-those of us that have them and see them coming from others find them quite enjoyable)

Again, as far as the moon and core meltdowns? I will yet again repeat myself, by saying,

Uh, Frank? Frank?? FRANK!!! Get back on topic—-it’s AGW!!!!! We don’t care what you looked up in “Displaying Dumbness to the World for Dummies”. Although I DO dearly love the idea of “imitation” core meltdowns, Frank, and I thank you for bringing it up again—-making us laugh once again. And thanks again for giving us some “facts” you gathered from “Nuclear Reactors for Dummies”—too bad you didn’t really understand what you read—-but I guess it’s understandable—you’re just a “looker upper”.

Frank, it’s English lesson time again—The opposite of “simple science“ is “complex science”, and “deepness” is for oceans. All science is serious, too bad you’re not.

I only use “extreme absurdity” when dealing with people whose thinking and statements are extremely absurd, Frank. It’s your problem, not mine.

ad hock ergo proctor hock? ad HOCK ergo PROCTOR HOCK? Lord love a demented and deluded duck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did Frank mean to say “ad hoc ergo propter hoc”? BWAAAAA-HAHAHAHAHAHA! Yet another attempt at “intellectualism” fails spectacularly. Give it up, Frank”

Everything quoted above is comprised of lying nonsense by a psychotic individual that needs to be confined in a mental institution for his safety as well as all of society.

Frank is back yet again, and somehow thinks that copying what I said in previous comments verbatim and posting it under his name is a “smart” thing to do? He finishes with the statement “Everything quoted above is comprised of lying nonsense by a psychotic individual that needs to be confined in a mental institution for his safety as well as all of society”

Is that one of those BALD ASSERTIONS that Frank is alwasys talking about? You know, those things where he says something and then acts as if it was true, even though he is the only person on Earth who believes it?

Very little original thought here, but I feel compelled to point out Frank’s saying to me in this comment, “but in your case maybe abortion is not such a bad idea”. Sounds like he is NOT wishing me well there (AGAIN). Of course, before he was just wishing me an early death, this is saying I should never have been born. Not nice, Frank..

Frank apparently means by “I am posting a quote from your last post that shows all your ignorance, insanity, self-delusional, lying, hateful bull$hit in one single move”, that everything I say is (ETC), since he has quoted two whole comments. Why couldn’t he just say that and be done with it? No wonder no one reads his stuff—too much self-deluded horsepucky to wade through..

Yeah, we know. Any time anyone argues with THE GREAT RIGHT BRAIN THINKER (who has a BA and MA in “science fields”) it’s horsepucky (whatever the hell that is). That’s right, it’s against the law to argue with people who have BA’s and MA’s in science fields.

Actually, rendarsmith, you can argue with me or anyone else you choose on PLD, and look as foolish as you care to look—-yo9u’re dong well today o9n achieving that.

Horsepucky is Horse-you-know-what, that unpleasant and smelly stuff like Bull pucky and the Dogpucky that folks sometimes step in. Pucky avoids the filters on the site that delete “bad words”. Too bad we don’t have a “stupid filter” as well. Some posters would disappear in a puff of “stupidity deleted” smoke.

What should be against the law is for people who are not educated in a field to use deluded opinions to develop arguments, and then argue against those who use facts, logic and rational thinking to develop theirs. That’s a crime.

RBT said: yo9u’re dong well today o9n achieving that.

Looks like the all omnipotent progressive/socialist school teacher opened up a new bottle of booze….and we wonder why our kids are dumber than a box of rocks!

That’s it RBT, you FAILED! I give you a score of ZERO which equates to your brain capacity!

LMAO!

APN….. Can whip any libtard with 1/2 my brain tied behind my back!

APN is still hanging around the ball field like the kid that’s left after all the kids with talent have been picked, looking forlorn and kicking at stones like the fact that the “o” and “9″ keys are adjacent to one another on the keyboard. .

Once again, he DEMANDS to be noticed, and since he can’t be noticed for saying something intelligent, he says something dumb. Thanks for once again living down to everyone’s expectations, APN.

I wonder how long it took him to think up this bit of stupidity?

“Can whip any libtard with 1/2 my brain tied behind my back!”

I wonder if he puts on that rooster suit evbery time when he struts and crows like this? What kind of fool thinks that he “wins” any argument just because he SAYS he did?. APN is a classic example of the the folks who are called “legends in their own minds”. LMAO, indeed!

RBT, you should easily know all the answers to Mr. Kahn’s questions given the fact that you assert yourself as the most intelligent human that has ever lived. We’re still wating by the way.

Anything of substance to add RBT or just more of the ranting-lunacy of a angry scenile ole man who pretends to be a “Scientist”.

APN

eddie is unfailingly too polite when he answers stupidity like this. I am not, so I will say to the moronic laughing boy, “GFYS, moron!”.

Hey RBT, I’m still wating on your response to the science quiz MR. Kahn gave you. You looked up the answers yet or did you not understand the questions?

It took you a long while to get this arrogantly stupid, correct?

Maybe about 72 years?

);->>>>

PS: It is a real joy toying with you. People like you are profoundly STUPID and too DUMB to reconize it.

RBT? RBT?? RBT???? HELLO RBT????????

Where did you go????

APN said:

PS: It is a real joy toying with you. People like you are profoundly STUPID and too DUMB to reconize it.

Shucks, you didn’t take the bait Mr. School Teacher, alias GW Scientist of the planet! I thought for sure you would come back and lecture me on how to spell RECOGNIZE!!!!

LMAO!

APN

Mindless A-null-ory-fuss speaks again

Truth hurts bro! I hate it for you….maybe anger management?

……and seriously speaking, I’ve never witnessed a greater SPANKING on this blog applied to you by Mr. Kahn, and you are just to arrogantly stupid to see it.

Poor man! I bet that extra large EGO of yours has been a major handicap over the years.

APN

Mindless A-null-ory-fuss speaks yet again.