Satellite data proves Earth has not been warming the past 18 years - it's stable

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Define "wasted". He probably enjoyed compiling the profiles and I certainly enjoyed viewing them. I'm guessing we're both high, late on a Saturday night, is there really anything that is a waste of time*?

*other than watching MSNBC
don't diss on lockup just because your tushy is sore.
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
Define "wasted". He probably enjoyed compiling the profiles and I certainly enjoyed viewing them. I'm guessing we're both high, late on a Saturday night, is there really anything that is a waste of time*?

*other than watching MSNBC
** and beating my meat while staring at rachel maddow's tits.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
seems like some idiots aren't aware that androgynous lesbian women often wrap their breasts to educe their size and visibility.
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
thus you deliberately implied that
1) co2's status as a greenhouse gas was in dispute, and thus
2) everyone arguing about the power of water is wrong.
Fuck me your over swollen ego has magically upped your ability to that of Psychic medium as well as climate expert

Do you do kiddy parties too?

Your psychic abilities aside the video was nothing but a reply to the specific statement I quoted from heckler it implied that you claim and if you spent the time wiping the spittle from your mouth before postingyou would see that
the termite thing had NOTHING to do with you, and was a direct result of BUCKY's red herring, not mine.
the water thing ALSO had nothing to do with you, and was a result of BUCKY disputing red's claim
And both are red herrings in a discussion about AGW
and still you maintain that i am claiming nitrogen is 50% a greenhouse gas.
You keep trying to save face by pretending you were half right completely blowing aside any modesty you had when youcorrected mistake (see pathetic attempt bellow)
i stated nitrogen was a greenhouse gas, in error, and corrected myself after you said "nuh UH!" (and as typical, provided no citation to back up your dispute)
Your the fuckwit making the claim without citation (false claim at that) now you bitch that I didn't cite? Ducking hilarious
i double checked MYSELF and found that i was lookin at a graph of NO2 not N.
If only you'd checked before making inane statements
the statement was a TWO-PARTER, and the second part is true, that nitrogen, due to being matter, can hold heat energy
the statement was half right and half wrong, which does NOT equate to "N is 50% greenhousey"
I gave you definition of greenhouse gas before you made that mistake

Posted from my greenhouse kindle
While drinking some greenhouse coffee
While looking out the window at greenhouse trees

You know they're all made of matter right they hold heat?

I think you should really really educate yourself on the difference between radiative and conductive heat
that is a Strawman you are attempting to construct, but as you are Clownshoes, youre having trouble getting your strawman to stand up.
but it holds heat right? Must be greenhouse

Sooner or later I suggest going and double checking greenhouse gas definition
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
lmfao Boozman cited Roy Spencer too! All these arguments are nothing but talking points right from the horses mouth

Fucking retards! It's hilarious!

Sanders fucking murdered it
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
wow, how compelling.

politicians talking about an issue they have made political rather than scientific.

those clowns cant balance a checkbook, and you think they understand the science in a complex and hotly contested issue like "global warming"?
Yeah you musta missed the 4 EPA admins appointed by republican presidents all in unanimous agreement about the scientific consensus on climate change
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
Yeah you musta missed the 4 EPA admins appointed by republican presidents all in unanimous agreement about the scientific consensus on climate change
and what are EPA adminstrators?
Professional Bureaucrats.

they are political creatures talking about political agendas.

bush1 and bush2 were both weak kneed pansies when the eco-lobby came knocking.
they appointed bureaucrats who could be confirmed by the democrat senate, nothing more.

political wrangling doesnt transform the issue into "Settled Science", and if you can ignore well respected members of the scientific community like dr's salby and spencer, how low must my interst be in 4 political appointees squawking about their super important bureaucracy's agenda?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
politicians talking about an issue they have made political rather than scientific.
didn't you cite the sydney institute, a political front group headed by a conservative dude and funded by shell oil (ever since tobacco denial fizzled out and phillip morris stopped sending checks)?
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
and what are EPA adminstrators?
Professional Bureaucrats.

they are political creatures talking about political agendas.

bush1 and bush2 were both weak kneed pansies when the eco-lobby came knocking.
they appointed bureaucrats who could be confirmed by the democrat senate, nothing more.

political wrangling doesnt transform the issue into "Settled Science", and if you can ignore well respected members of the scientific community like dr's salby and spencer, how low must my interst be in 4 political appointees squawking about their super important bureaucracy's agenda?
You're a retard
 
Top