Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 45 of 45

Thread: I'm Sorry ...

  1. #41
    Soaring like an Eagle gary67's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    In a field in Hanmer
    Posts
    14,000

    Default Re: I'm Sorry ...

    Sorry Bozo that's not the BM way, just shoot down anything you don't want to understand is the way.

  2. #42
    Wrinkly Member! B.M.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Mount Maunganui
    Posts
    6,790

    Default Re: I'm Sorry ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bozo View Post
    If you go back to the original article, you will note that in various places throughout there is text that is a different colour indicating that it is a hyperlink - just like this word just here.

    See here:

    Attachment 8940
    Ok, so according to the Climate Change Abacus 1 x 87 = 980!

    I’ll keep that in mind next time I run into more dodgy mathematics.

    What’s worse is I’ve just found a sock with a hole in it, which in turn I guess is further proof of “Climate Change”.
    Global Warming is Mann made.
    .
    .
    The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

  3. #43
    Insane Bozo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    ...inside a binary byte...
    Posts
    1,205

    Default Re: I'm Sorry ...

    Quote Originally Posted by B.M. View Post
    Ok, so according to the Climate Change Abacus 1 x 87 = 980!

    Quote Originally Posted by B.M. View Post
    Well actually I don’t want to know about the colour of the Ice or Water.

    Your willful desire to not understand what the impacts of colours/materials and how they absorb/reflect/react to sunlight/heat probably feeds quite well into your other statement.

    As expected you also did not read any of the scientific data or studies I provided probably because that requires time/effort and may provide insight into why your "dodgy mathematics" seems wrong and at worst proves you wrong.

    There is nothing wrong with having a different opinion, but you cannot call a scientific study a "sock with a hole in it" without providing evidence to the contrary.

    Aldous Huxley is quoted as saying, "Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored".

    Ignore the data all you wish, but you cannot disclaim it, call it incorrect without proving (either yourself or with another scientific peer reviewed study) it to be incorrect.

    Well I guess you can, you can remain willfully ignorant if you so desire - why anyone would choose this on any given topic (medicine, technology, literally anything) is beyond me.... each to their own.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    Thats a good idea,and everybody should be whipped if they disagree.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    We like to live on the edge.

  4. #44
    Wrinkly Member! B.M.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Mount Maunganui
    Posts
    6,790

    Default Re: I'm Sorry ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bozo View Post
    Your willful desire to not understand what the impacts of colours/materials and how they absorb/reflect/react to sunlight/heat probably feeds quite well into your other statement.

    As expected you also did not read any of the scientific data or studies I provided probably because that requires time/effort and may provide insight into why your "dodgy mathematics" seems wrong and at worst proves you wrong.

    There is nothing wrong with having a different opinion, but you cannot call a scientific study a "sock with a hole in it" without providing evidence to the contrary.

    Aldous Huxley is quoted as saying, "Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored".

    Ignore the data all you wish, but you cannot disclaim it, call it incorrect without proving (either yourself or with another scientific peer reviewed study) it to be incorrect.

    Well I guess you can, you can remain willfully ignorant if you so desire - why anyone would choose this on any given topic (medicine, technology, literally anything) is beyond me.... each to their own.
    Well Bozo it is an interesting discussion but I can firstly assure you, that the heat absorption, and heat radiation, of different colours was 3rd form Science in my day.

    Of course my argument is that they have tried to twist mathematics by incorporating pseudo science which is shows them as pathetic.

    Remember always, that Global Warming/Climate Change is “Pseudo Science”, it’s only some “Dick Heads Theory”.

    However, I have taken the trouble to follow the links you’ve provided and hope you will follow mine.

    HERE That’s a bit of me.

    HERE He’s on my side.

    HERE

    But wait, there’s more, Roald Amundsen sailed this this thing through the North West Passage in 1906.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	GJOA.jpg 
Views:	10 
Size:	42.1 KB 
ID:	8952
    Global Warming is Mann made.
    .
    .
    The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

  5. #45
    Insane Bozo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    ...inside a binary byte...
    Posts
    1,205

    Default Re: I'm Sorry ...

    Quote Originally Posted by B.M. View Post
    Well Bozo it is an interesting discussion but I can firstly assure you, that the heat absorption, and heat radiation, of different colours was 3rd form Science in my day.
    Ok well that's a good start, so I assume we can both agree that darker colours absorb more sun/heat whereas lighter colours reflect more than the darker colours?

    With that in mind I'm sure we can also agree that there is merit in the fact that should large areas of the earth that have been light (ice) for a long time that are starting to melt and show darker colours (algae/water) might therefore absorb more heat?

    Whether or not this melt is man made, a natural cycle, will become covered in ice again in the future is up for debate - unfortunately no one can see into the future. The best we can do is estimate based on current data and trends and attempt to plan accordingly.

    In response to the videos you posted, I haven't finished watching/fact checking the 2nd (the longer of the 2 with the meteorologist) but the first one by Daniel Peña was interesting.
    A few things I would point out is that he is a business man and a business coach, not a scientist. While I won't labour on that point it is just something worth keeping in mind.

    Would you trust a business man or a economist to give you medical advice, or perhaps a builder/plumber to give you advice on space travel? Of course not, while these individuals might have some very valid points and considerations, you go to the qualified professionals for their help, and if you doubt their opinions you get a second opinion from another qualified professional and compare results. Everyone is human, mistakes are made.

    His potty mouth aside, and the fact that he is a Trump supporter - he did raise a valid question: Why are banks investing in properties that according to climate change believers will be covered in water in 40+ years?

    An interesting question, banks have never ever invested poorly that has resulted in the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars, or have they? This list more than 85 banks in the US alone that have invested and lost more than 1 billion dollars each - the largest being $307 billion dollars.

    But yea, Daniel Peña is correct, if banks are investing in those properties - it must be safe to assume that global warming is a myth, the ocean clearly isn't rising and all that data that shows otherwise is wrong, silly us, banks a NEVER wrong are they?

    Another interesting point he raised was why are these properties near the ocean not being sold with a disclaimer that in ~40 years they will be drowned by the rising ocean.

    Not sure, but it might be something to do with the fact that if they had to list every single bad possibility that could occur (man made or force of nature), the ensuing document would be a short novel. I think this is why insurance companies exist and why they have different levels of cover to help protect the owner in the case of said emergencies. I might be wrong... but I'm pretty sure the bank doesn't give a rats ******** about whether or not your house burns down or is drowned in the ocean - you borrowed money from them, you now pay interest on said money and have to pay back all that money + the interest = bank profit, they really don't care where that money comes from but you are now their slave.

    Something worth considering also, I'm not quite sure how this panned out for all the banks/insurance companies who invested money in Christchurch mind you - in a country that is so well known for earthquakes it is known as the Shaky Isles. But of course, all the banks hired seismologists to check that the ground on which all those houses/offices were built was sound...

    But the takeaway from his 5 minutes is simple; Banks are still investing - therefore global warming/climate change is a myth!

    Great! I'll go ask my mortgage broker if buying a house in Wellington is a good idea, and if there is ever a big earthquake there I will personally hold him responsible for the fact my house is now destroyed and he didn't tell me that an earthquake was coming.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    Thats a good idea,and everybody should be whipped if they disagree.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
    We like to live on the edge.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •