Australian Politics Forum - Avoiding Climate Extremism

jame-e

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 426
Darwin (currently)
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #375 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 5:59pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

The Carbon tax is a BELIEF rather than a science. .

What?

Are you religious?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.
What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

Back to top

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #376 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:33pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:30pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:

astro_surf wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 12:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 11:43am:

But you never really addressed the point of the thread. Im not sure you even understood it.

Oh, I understood it just fine, it was a poor attempt at projecting your own anti science, climate extremism onto others.

Agreed!

given that you have only one topic in your head, nedwin your opinion doesnt count for much.

LW,
1st, my apology, I said Maqqa, stryder, the creep & others are "bona fide idiots" whereas I should have said, Maqqa, stryder, the creep, LW & others are "bona fide idiots"!

PS - I've lost count how many times I've told you that I'm not nedwin, which makes you ever thicker for continuing to use the line.
Finally, your also incorrect, as there are many issues that I comment on, not just one!

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 5:14pm:

astro_surf wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 4:43pm:

And just in case the retards don't get it yet; please refer to the following image and explain exactly where you can see anything that has happened in the last 500 years.

Astro,
The expression, "as thick as two bricks", originated with people like Maqqa, Cods, the creep, stryder etc!!!

Not only does this F@CKING idiot Maqqa -
1) Have no idea about the difference between 330 years & 330,000 years.
or
2) Not know what 10C means, in Global Terms.
or
3) Have no comprehension what she reads, nor can she understand what simple graphs/charts mean.

But, she just doesn't care anything about the long term future of the species.

In fact, all she is, is a small time mouth piece, with limited knowledge, for a small time organisation (the CONServatives/Liberals), who also have limited knowledge and who also don't give a rats ass, for the future of OZ or the human species!

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 2:56pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:45pm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_Petit_data.svg

Interesting graph

Looking at the "pre-industrial" carbon level claims it's totally shot out of the water

So what was the cause of the carbon peak about 330 years ago?

And what was the variation in temperature from peak to trough?

About 10C!!!!

Well, now that I've had time to contemplate my statements and reviewed the thoughts that you, Maqqa, stryder, the creep & others have put into your comments, I would like to say that my earlier comment of
"you are a bona fide idiot", STILL STANDS!

In fact, in your case Maqqa, you are an idiot - 1st class!

WHY, you ask?

Well, the charts you referred to DIDN't show a "pre-industrial" carbon level peak, about 330 years ago.
It actually showed a "pre-human" Carbon Peak, ABOUT 330,000 YEARS AGO!!!

And, the 10C Temperature variation, from trough to Peak, that you infer was insignificant, was HUGE, when you consider they were referring to the Global Annual Average temperature, which is about 14C.

The 10C they refer to, is not YOUR usual description of the variation between the daily minimum & maximum, IT TAKES IN ALL SEASONS, DAY & NIGHT, FROM THE EQUATOR TO BOTH POLES!!!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Vostok_Petit_data.svg

AS I SAID, "YOU ARE A BONA FIDE F@CKING IDIOT"!!!

Actually, you're worse, you are a "mouth piece" for the SPIN MACHINE of a Political Party and the Liberal/CONServatives, at that!!!

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #377 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:35pm

jame-e wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 5:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

The Carbon tax is a BELIEF rather than a science. .

What?

Are you religious?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.
What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

not one of your more rational responses. Why is it that when attempting to rebuff logic viewpoints you revert to stereotyping and plain ignorance? you might want to raise the level of your posts a little.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #378 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:36pm

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:30pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:

astro_surf wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 12:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 11:43am:

But you never really addressed the point of the thread. Im not sure you even understood it.

Oh, I understood it just fine, it was a poor attempt at projecting your own anti science, climate extremism onto others.

Agreed!

given that you have only one topic in your head, nedwin your opinion doesnt count for much.

LW,
1st, my apology, I said Maqqa, stryder, the creep & others are "bona fide idiots" whereas I should have said, Maqqa, stryder, the creep, LW & others are "bona fide idiots"!

PS - I've lost count how many times I've told you that I'm not nedwin, which makes you ever thicker for continuing to use the line.
Finally, your also incorrect, as there are many issues that I comment on, not just one!

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 5:14pm:

astro_surf wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 4:43pm:

And just in case the retards don't get it yet; please refer to the following image and explain exactly where you can see anything that has happened in the last 500 years.

Astro,
The expression, "as thick as two bricks", originated with people like Maqqa, Cods, the creep, stryder etc!!!

Not only does this F@CKING idiot Maqqa -
1) Have no idea about the difference between 330 years & 330,000 years.
or
2) Not know what 10C means, in Global Terms.
or
3) Have no comprehension what she reads, nor can she understand what simple graphs/charts mean.

But, she just doesn't care anything about the long term future of the species.

In fact, all she is, is a small time mouth piece, with limited knowledge, for a small time organisation (the CONServatives/Liberals), who also have limited knowledge and who also don't give a rats ass, for the future of OZ or the human species!

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 2:56pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:45pm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_Petit_data.svg

Interesting graph

Looking at the "pre-industrial" carbon level claims it's totally shot out of the water

So what was the cause of the carbon peak about 330 years ago?

And what was the variation in temperature from peak to trough?

About 10C!!!!

Well, now that I've had time to contemplate my statements and reviewed the thoughts that you, Maqqa, stryder, the creep & others have put into your comments, I would like to say that my earlier comment of
"you are a bona fide idiot", STILL STANDS!

In fact, in your case Maqqa, you are an idiot - 1st class!

WHY, you ask?

Well, the charts you referred to DIDN't show a "pre-industrial" carbon level peak, about 330 years ago.
It actually showed a "pre-human" Carbon Peak, ABOUT 330,000 YEARS AGO!!!

And, the 10C Temperature variation, from trough to Peak, that you infer was insignificant, was HUGE, when you consider they were referring to the Global Annual Average temperature, which is about 14C.

The 10C they refer to, is not YOUR usual description of the variation between the daily minimum & maximum, IT TAKES IN ALL SEASONS, DAY & NIGHT, FROM THE EQUATOR TO BOTH POLES!!!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Vostok_Petit_data.svg

AS I SAID, "YOU ARE A BONA FIDE F@CKING IDIOT"!!!

Actually, you're worse, you are a "mouth piece" for the SPIN MACHINE of a Political Party and the Liberal/CONServatives, at that!!!

We ALL believe you to be nedwin because he disappeared just as you appeared and had the almost exact same message. Even if Im wrong, all that means is that there are TWO idiots like nedwin around. Dont expect me to get too perturbed by that.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Maqqa

Gold Member

Offline

14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #379 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:38pm

I am glad at least 1 lefty reads

The graph actually came from the explanation of carbon emissions for Ice Ages

Now you proved you can read - look at why the Carbon peaked and troughed without any human interventions at all

Given that you can read then you will also realise that humans contribute 3% to the whole carbon cycle therefore any cut in it's contribution will have any effect on global temperature

Back to top

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number

IP Logged

Wimmera Full Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 118	Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism Reply #380 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:53pm Yes, that 3% human contribution is a real worry, isn't it. If it were around 30% then perhaps the matter of anthropogenic global warming might actually mean something. In the meantime, the AGW religionists are hell-bent on destroying economies across the world, not just Australia's small economy.
Back to top	IP Logged

jame-e

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 426
Darwin (currently)
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #381 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 7:28pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

not one of your more rational responses. Why is it that when attempting to rebuff logic viewpoints you revert to stereotyping and plain ignorance? you might want to raise the level of your posts a little.

Do you want to answer? How about a different question. Do you believe that cancer kills people?
The point was not if your religious or not, it was to demonstrate that either way your contradicting yourself. Whats the difference between science and a belief?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.
What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #382 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 7:52pm

jame-e wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 7:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

not one of your more rational responses. Why is it that when attempting to rebuff logic viewpoints you revert to stereotyping and plain ignorance? you might want to raise the level of your posts a little.

Do you want to answer? How about a different question. Do you believe that cancer kills people?
The point was not if your religious or not, it was to demonstrate that either way your contradicting yourself. Whats the difference between science and a belief?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.
What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

If you are stupid enough to ask that question hen you are too stupid to comprehend the answer.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

astro_surf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2981

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #383 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 7:56pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 7:52pm:

jame-e wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 7:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

not one of your more rational responses. Why is it that when attempting to rebuff logic viewpoints you revert to stereotyping and plain ignorance? you might want to raise the level of your posts a little.

Do you want to answer? How about a different question. Do you believe that cancer kills people?
The point was not if your religious or not, it was to demonstrate that either way your contradicting yourself. Whats the difference between science and a belief?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.
What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

If you are stupid enough to ask that question hen you are too stupid to comprehend the answer.

Way to concede the argument, LW! Grin

Back to top

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 11:23am:

So tell me, you'd like to see more and more craphouse coloured people in Australia right?&&Yeah good idea moron.&&

IP Logged

jame-e

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 426
Darwin (currently)
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #384 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:05pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

Whats the difference between science and a belief?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

If you are stupid enough to ask that question hen you are too stupid to comprehend the answer.

Try me.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.
What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #385 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:12pm

jame-e wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:05pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

Whats the difference between science and a belief?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

If you are stupid enough to ask that question hen you are too stupid to comprehend the answer.

Try me.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

Ive explained this more times than you can understand. I opposed the carbon tax because it DOES NOT WORK. let me try this again...

THE CARBON TAX DOES NOT REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS.

it has been tried and failed. The EU said exactly that. Phase one of their ETS has not reduced emissions AT ALL. it did not reduce the rate of increaese either. it had ZERO EFFECT. this is also the experience of other countries.

You are probably too young to remember how the massive smog pollution from cars was ended. modern cars now produce 1/10,000 the amount of their 1970s equivalents. How do you think that major problem was fixed? let me give you a clue. They didnt tax emissions. They legislated their way around it. and voila! it worked. Amazing, aint it!

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #386 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:15pm

jame-e wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:05pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

Whats the difference between science and a belief?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

If you are stupid enough to ask that question hen you are too stupid to comprehend the answer.

Try me.

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

We have polllies and writers desperately seeking a carbon tax and pronouncing how it will save the world and so on.

Extreme hyperbole right there, who pronounces that it will 'save the world'?

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 3:30pm:

yet in every single example of it being in use anywhere inthe world it has totally failed to acheive any of its objectives. Know this, what kind of person continues to push for a policy that is already known to NOT WORK?? Idealogues. EXtremists. rational people would suggest a different methodology.

We have been through this and you have failed to demonstrate this 'total failure'.
All sides of politics in Australia have recognised the need to lower emissions. There is a debate about the best way to do this.
It does not matter if you like it or not, believe in it or not, there is broad agreement in this country that a ETS/carbon tax is the best way to lower emissions. Broad agreement outside of politics obviously, but Turnbull has made things interesting.
Considering also what the rest of the world is doing i fail to see the extremism in the desire for a carbon tax.

Even if you don’t belive the science, i find it amazing that you think a carbon tax is extreme.
What would a desire to shut down all powerstaions and go back to wood fires and kerosene be considered?
Super duper extreme? Is there a more extreme word than extreme?

maybe you would be better suited for a thread called 'Avoiding Debating stupidity'. I have a cartoon written especially for you. Ironcially of coure, you wont understand it.

Back to top

debate_002.JPG (35 KB | 20 )

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Cliff Richard Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 558	Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism Reply #387 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:22pm only longweekend gets the highbrow dilbert cartoons
Back to top	IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #388 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:25pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:36pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:30pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:

astro_surf wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 12:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 11:43am:

But you never really addressed the point of the thread. Im not sure you even understood it.

Oh, I understood it just fine, it was a poor attempt at projecting your own anti science, climate extremism onto others.

Agreed!

given that you have only one topic in your head, nedwin your opinion doesnt count for much.

LW,
1st, my apology, I said Maqqa, stryder, the creep & others are "bona fide idiots" whereas I should have said, Maqqa, stryder, the creep, LW & others are "bona fide idiots"!

PS - I've lost count how many times I've told you that I'm not nedwin, which makes you ever thicker for continuing to use the line.
Finally, your also incorrect, as there are many issues that I comment on, not just one!

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 5:14pm:

astro_surf wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 4:43pm:

And just in case the retards don't get it yet; please refer to the following image and explain exactly where you can see anything that has happened in the last 500 years.

Astro,
The expression, "as thick as two bricks", originated with people like Maqqa, Cods, the creep, stryder etc!!!

Not only does this F@CKING idiot Maqqa -
1) Have no idea about the difference between 330 years & 330,000 years.
or
2) Not know what 10C means, in Global Terms.
or
3) Have no comprehension what she reads, nor can she understand what simple graphs/charts mean.

But, she just doesn't care anything about the long term future of the species.

In fact, all she is, is a small time mouth piece, with limited knowledge, for a small time organisation (the CONServatives/Liberals), who also have limited knowledge and who also don't give a rats ass, for the future of OZ or the human species!

perceptions_now wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 2:56pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 1:45pm:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_Petit_data.svg

Interesting graph

Looking at the "pre-industrial" carbon level claims it's totally shot out of the water

So what was the cause of the carbon peak about 330 years ago?

And what was the variation in temperature from peak to trough?

About 10C!!!!

Well, now that I've had time to contemplate my statements and reviewed the thoughts that you, Maqqa, stryder, the creep & others have put into your comments, I would like to say that my earlier comment of
"you are a bona fide idiot", STILL STANDS!

In fact, in your case Maqqa, you are an idiot - 1st class!

WHY, you ask?

Well, the charts you referred to DIDN't show a "pre-industrial" carbon level peak, about 330 years ago.
It actually showed a "pre-human" Carbon Peak, ABOUT 330,000 YEARS AGO!!!

And, the 10C Temperature variation, from trough to Peak, that you infer was insignificant, was HUGE, when you consider they were referring to the Global Annual Average temperature, which is about 14C.

The 10C they refer to, is not YOUR usual description of the variation between the daily minimum & maximum, IT TAKES IN ALL SEASONS, DAY & NIGHT, FROM THE EQUATOR TO BOTH POLES!!!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Vostok_Petit_data.svg

AS I SAID, "YOU ARE A BONA FIDE F@CKING IDIOT"!!!

Actually, you're worse, you are a "mouth piece" for the SPIN MACHINE of a Political Party and the Liberal/CONServatives, at that!!!

We ALL believe you to be nedwin because he disappeared just as you appeared and had the almost exact same message.

Even if Im wrong, all that means is that there are TWO idiots like nedwin around. Dont expect me to get too perturbed by that.

That's just CRAP!

Both nedwin & I had been there (at Yahoo) for some time and whilst I am not nedwin, he can more than take care of fools like you, Maqqa & others of similar ilk!

You were talking about, "stereotyping and plain ignorance"?

PS - I don'y care, if you get perturbed or not!

Back to top

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: Avoiding Climate Extremism
Reply #389 - Jun 13^th, 2011 at 8:40pm

Maqqa wrote on Jun 13^th, 2011 at 6:38pm:

I am glad at least 1 lefty reads

The graph actually came from the explanation of carbon emissions for Ice Ages

Now you proved you can read - look at why the Carbon peaked and troughed without any human interventions at all

Given that you can read then you will also realise that humans contribute 3% to the whole carbon cycle therefore any cut in it's contribution will have any effect on global temperature

You have something in common with LongWeakend, "stereotyping and plain ignorance".

When you can read & comprehend, basic information, then you MAY do your own research and finally realise what a TWAT you have made of yourself!

Back to top

IP Logged