Australian Politics Forum - AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #90 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:56am

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

muso wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 8:14am:

Well I'm back, but I see nothing has changed.

Lots has changed, haven't you heard?, the Australian electoral system is causing bushfires to break out all over Australia Grin

An "undeniable fact of nature", apparently.

The "brain" washing continues.

So you are disputing the fact that human driven CO2 levels that are rising with time act to warm the planet?

You have a lot of explaining to do Greggy

Get to it, keep searching those google-ised crack pot web sites to back up your religious doctrine and defend your delusional priests.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139605
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #91 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:01am

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

muso wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 8:14am:

Well I'm back, but I see nothing has changed.

Lots has changed, haven't you heard?, the Australian electoral system is causing bushfires to break out all over Australia Grin

An "undeniable fact of nature", apparently.

The "brain" washing continues.

So you are disputing the fact that human driven CO2 levels that are rising with time act to warm the planet?

You have a lot of explaining to do Greggy

No, you do actually.

AGW is your theory: the onus is on you to provide some convincing evidence.

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #92 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:16am

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:01am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

muso wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 8:14am:

Well I'm back, but I see nothing has changed.

Lots has changed, haven't you heard?, the Australian electoral system is causing bushfires to break out all over Australia Grin

An "undeniable fact of nature", apparently.

The "brain" washing continues.

So you are disputing the fact that human driven CO2 levels that are rising with time act to warm the planet?

You have a lot of explaining to do Greggy

No, you do actually.

AGW is your theory: the onus is on you to provide some convincing evidence.

Anthropogenically induced Global Warming is when human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and de-forestation cause increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentration which acts to warm the planet.

You obviously have a problem with this primary school level Scientific fact, which was first proposed in the mid 19th century and was empirically validated in the late 1980s.

You have a lot of explaining to do on behalf of your church group and its priests

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139605
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #93 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:27am

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:16am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:01am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

muso wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 8:14am:

Well I'm back, but I see nothing has changed.

Lots has changed, haven't you heard?, the Australian electoral system is causing bushfires to break out all over Australia Grin

An "undeniable fact of nature", apparently.

The "brain" washing continues.

So you are disputing the fact that human driven CO2 levels that are rising with time act to warm the planet?

You have a lot of explaining to do Greggy

No, you do actually.

AGW is your theory: the onus is on you to provide some convincing evidence.

Anthropogenically induced Global Warming is when human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and de-forestation cause increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentration which acts to warm the planet.

That's the theory. Well done.

Your assignment now is to come up with some convincing evidence to show that this is actually happening.

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #94 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:36am

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:27am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:16am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:01am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

muso wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 8:14am:

Well I'm back, but I see nothing has changed.

Lots has changed, haven't you heard?, the Australian electoral system is causing bushfires to break out all over Australia Grin

An "undeniable fact of nature", apparently.

The "brain" washing continues.

So you are disputing the fact that human driven CO2 levels that are rising with time act to warm the planet?

You have a lot of explaining to do Greggy

No, you do actually.

AGW is your theory: the onus is on you to provide some convincing evidence.

Anthropogenically induced Global Warming is when human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and de-forestation cause increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentration which acts to warm the planet.

That's the theory. Well done.

Your assignment now is to come up with some convincing evidence to show that this is actually happening.

let me see if I can summarise your religious sermon

You dispute the FACT that rising CO2 levels caused by human activities drive the global temperature upwards??

Interesting....

Can you think of any reasons why your religious beliefs are true?

Apart from CO2 NOT been classed as a greenhouse gas AND/OR CO2 NOT being a by product of fossil fuel combustion.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139605
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #95 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:43am

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:27am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:16am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:01am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

muso wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 8:14am:

Well I'm back, but I see nothing has changed.

Lots has changed, haven't you heard?, the Australian electoral system is causing bushfires to break out all over Australia Grin

An "undeniable fact of nature", apparently.

The "brain" washing continues.

So you are disputing the fact that human driven CO2 levels that are rising with time act to warm the planet?

You have a lot of explaining to do Greggy

No, you do actually.

AGW is your theory: the onus is on you to provide some convincing evidence.

Anthropogenically induced Global Warming is when human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and de-forestation cause increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentration which acts to warm the planet.

That's the theory. Well done.

Your assignment now is to come up with some convincing evidence to show that this is actually happening.

let me see if I can summarise your religious sermon

You dispute the FACT that rising CO2 levels caused by human activities drive the global temperature upwards??

Interesting....

Can you think of any reasons why your religious beliefs are true?

Apart from CO2 NOT been classed as a greenhouse gas AND/OR CO2 NOT being a by product of fossil fuel combustion.

Your assignment is due next week.

I suggest you get on with it.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation Reply #96 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 1:33pm Chimp:
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

Innocent bystander Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4220 Gender:	Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation Reply #97 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 3:41pm chimp, never argue with smart people, they will kick your big red monkey arse every time.
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #98 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 3:56pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:27am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:16am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:01am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 9:36am:

Innocent bystander wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 12:19pm:

muso wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2013 at 8:14am:

Well I'm back, but I see nothing has changed.

Lots has changed, haven't you heard?, the Australian electoral system is causing bushfires to break out all over Australia Grin

An "undeniable fact of nature", apparently.

The "brain" washing continues.

So you are disputing the fact that human driven CO2 levels that are rising with time act to warm the planet?

You have a lot of explaining to do Greggy

No, you do actually.

AGW is your theory: the onus is on you to provide some convincing evidence.

Anthropogenically induced Global Warming is when human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and de-forestation cause increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentration which acts to warm the planet.

That's the theory. Well done.

Your assignment now is to come up with some convincing evidence to show that this is actually happening.

So let me see if I can pin point the main brunt of your illness.

You are claiming that it is impossible for human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and de forestation to cause the CO2 levels to rise, and therefore increase the earths thermal retention rate?

Are you also disputing that the ozone depletion mechanism is not catalysed by the presence of CFCs in the earths atmosphere?

That's rather strange don't you?

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Innocent bystander Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4220 Gender:	Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation Reply #99 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 4:22pm Chump, you should refer to this if you want to know how silly the argument over this piddly bit of extra co2 really is ... http://www.c3headlines.com/2009/07/what-does-800-ppm-co2-look-like-vs-300-ppm-th... I've never seen a more convincing example that clearly illustrates the insanity of it all
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #100 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 4:31pm

Dear Mr Greggy,

Lets try to simplify this matter to the point where even you can comprehend the basic ideas

I will assume that YOU accept the natural phenomenon of rain fall or precipitation as a FACT.

Now the FACT of precipitation does have an accepted scientific theoretical foundation which describes how and why rain forms and falls etc. The precipitation theory forms the basis of computer modelling. And both the theory and the modelling techniques can have varying degrees of complexity and predictive accuracy depending upon the assumptions made and other factors.

But as we all know, Mr Greggy would have us all believe that RAINFALL is just a theory - like gravity, We can have a subjective opinion on it and deny its very existence.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 25^th, 2013 at 4:37pm by Chimp_Logic »

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139605
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #101 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 4:58pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 4:31pm:

But as we all know, Mr Greggy would have us all believe that RAINFALL is just a theory - like gravity, We can have a subjective opinion on it and deny its very existence.

AGW is a theory (a theory full of holes and laden with faults, by the way).

It is not "an undeniable fact of nature".

Sorry.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139605
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #102 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 5:00pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 3:56pm:

You are claiming that it is impossible for human activities such as fossil fuel combustion and de forestation to cause the CO2 levels to rise, and therefore increase the earths thermal retention rate?

No, not at all.

You might need to get your eyes checked.

http://www.specsavers.com.au/eyecare/eye-exam/

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #103 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 6:51pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

Your assignment is due next week.

I suggest you get on with it.

Now you're using my material? I am flattered.

Are you aware that the tobacco corporations still refuse to accept any direct causal link between smoking their products and health risks such as cancer?

Of course the causal links between smoking tobacco and increased detrimental health risks is just theoretical in nature. The medical science is not settled yet, there is insufficient evidence to support this connection.

With respect to the AGW fact, even the fossil fuel corporations accept the science and are calling for urgent action to be taken on a global scale.

So mr. Greggy is very much fixed to the altar of his weekly church. Praying.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 139605
Gender: male

Re: AGW contrarians owe us a (scientific) explanation
Reply #104 - Oct 25^th, 2013 at 6:59pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 6:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 25^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

Your assignment is due next week.

I suggest you get on with it.

Now you're using my material? I am flattered.

Are you aware that the tobacco corporations still refuse to accept any direct causal link between smoking their products and health risks such as cancer?

Of course the causal links between smoking tobacco and increased detrimental health risks is just theoretical in nature. The medical science is not settled yet, there is insufficient evidence to support this connection.

With respect to the AGW fact, even the fossil fuel corporations accept the science and are calling for urgent action to be taken on a global scale.

So mr. Greggy is very much fixed to the altar of his weekly church. Praying.

You're a joy to watch.

Resigned to the fact that you've lost the argument, you now try to deflect by introducing irrelevant points.

Rain, gravity, and now tobacco.

AGW is a theory. It is not "an undeniable fact of nature".

Stay focused.

Back to top

IP Logged