Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/11/2023 10:01:00 PM (view original):
lmao, check out the L.Ron Hubbard chart above. This is why intellectuals don't take Climate Change Theory seriously. What a joke...

I think you are nutz to say that.
:)
Look at what you said / because you do not agree with a WIS poster with a chart - thus Republican intellectuals ( clearly an endangered species ) don’t take climate change seriously.
It does not make any sense.
Or maybe you are saying don’t trust the sincerity of the real intelligent people because the bagchuck is a representative of them.
Whst a crazy thing to try to say.
Post hoc ergo proctor hoc. Not.

The only people that should be taken seriously are the significant scientific community which is almost in unanimous agreement.

What my scientific analysis is and any layman’s scientific analysis is - is bullshit to use as proof or non proof And that has been my point.

I can honestly say that there is not a person here from the lib side that has ever used the poor examples as perfect representatives of an entire side or party.

I discuss their stupidity but I don’t put them on a pedestal to prove the stupidity or racism of the party once known as the Republican Party.

One man one vote one post.

You can't present data that way. I do have a Master Degree in Genetics and have experience with both academia and journal publication, No graduate school in the world, let alone a peer review scientific publication, would stand for such an absurdly constructed graph.

I'm not questioning the data, per se. I have no idea about the methodology used to make that kind of comment. Showing hundreds of millions of years and a couple thousand years (or hundred years) occupying the same linear space on the x axis would get laughed out of the room.

A few more quick hits.

L. Ron Hubbard refers to the chart maker, not bags.

Intellectual has nothing to do with intelligence. It means using rational thought processes rather than emotional ones to reach a conclusion.

That graph is designed to only elicit an emotional response since it has no scientific value.

The studies embedded in the graph (Zachos et al, etc.) I would guess are actual peer reviewed scientific articles. The chart itself was probably made by a Scientologist who lives in his mother's basement and talks to God through his flatulence.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/11/2023 10:48:00 PM (view original):
A few more quick hits.

L. Ron Hubbard refers to the chart maker, not bags.

Intellectual has nothing to do with intelligence. It means using rational thought processes rather than emotional ones to reach a conclusion.

That graph is designed to only elicit an emotional response since it has no scientific value.

The studies embedded in the graph (Zachos et al, etc.) I would guess are actual peer reviewed scientific articles. The chart itself was probably made by a Scientologist who lives in his mother's basement and talks to God through his flatulence.

Fair enough - I didn’t even bother to look at the chart but whatever it says what leads you to extrapolate that if proves that mostly libs are not serious .

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/11/2023 5:15:00 PM (view original):
I'll have to check him out.

any album is great but check out his newest (weathervanes) or the Nashville Sound...two of my favorites

So I looked at the chart. I have no idea what it is or means. I congratulate you on the academia but what does a masters in genetics have to do with climatology.
I think you went way way way overboard in using a chart posted by a bagadocuous chucker and giving it some magic power of this is wrong and this they are all a bunch of idiots….whatever the hell the chart purports it is.

Dog Mo is to try to trick someone into saying something he can exploit and then say he says it stands for all of them and thus they are all wrong.
He can’t find his bone and he is still looking.

im onto the conservative type of games he does.
the conservative pols spend all of their time with those types of cynical divisive games.

So I looked at the chart. I have no idea what it is or means. I congratulate you on the academia but what does a masters in genetics have to do with climatology.
I think you went way way way overboard in using a chart posted by a bagadocuous chucker and giving it some magic power of this is wrong and this they are all a bunch of idiots….whatever the hell the chart purports it is.

Dog Mo is to try to trick someone into saying something he can exploit and then say he says it stands for all of them and thus they are all wrong.
He can’t find his bone and he is still looking.

im onto the conservative type of games he does.
the conservative pols spend all of their time with those types of cynical divisive games.

Posted by Lennybruce26 on 7/11/2023 11:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/11/2023 10:48:00 PM (view original):
A few more quick hits.

L. Ron Hubbard refers to the chart maker, not bags.

Intellectual has nothing to do with intelligence. It means using rational thought processes rather than emotional ones to reach a conclusion.

That graph is designed to only elicit an emotional response since it has no scientific value.

The studies embedded in the graph (Zachos et al, etc.) I would guess are actual peer reviewed scientific articles. The chart itself was probably made by a Scientologist who lives in his mother's basement and talks to God through his flatulence.

Fair enough - I didn’t even bother to look at the chart but whatever it says what leads you to extrapolate that if proves that mostly libs are not serious .

Expressed myself poorly.

Both sides are so full of sh*t that they probably have a hard time telling what's real and what is not real. That graph was pure propaganda. It could have been constructed in a way to actually convey meaning but my guess is that it was intentionally created to have incorrect content to flame passions on one side of the debate...like a staged frontier incident that is then used to declare war.

However, the Right does the same exact nonsense...playing the same exact game. They make up their own overt lies out of whole cloth and their army of useful idiots then goes about creating "conservative" nonsensical graphs depicting absolutely nothing just like the one bags posted.

My disgust goes in both directions.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/11/2023 10:01:00 PM (view original):
lmao, check out the L.Ron Hubbard chart above. This is why intellectuals don't take Climate Change Theory seriously. What a joke...

Oks, so Iam older than most. I never believed the alarmists and I never will. Here are some examples of why:

In 1970, The Boston Globe carried this one page story that a bunch of climate scientists did studies that showed that we were heading into another ice age. It went on and on to sound pretty convincing. This article also said we could be in the deep freeze by the 21 Century. . People took notice. Over the next several years, new stuff came out supporting the first claim. the people believed it. One report in particular stated that Satellite images showed that an ice age was coming, and much sooner than we think. People talked about this and I stood and said this is a bunch of bullsh*t. I was scoffed at.At this same time, more scientific 'experts' were telling us we were in an energy crisis and there would be no more oil by 1984. Well they were wrong on that one too. BUT the sheeple believed it.and THEN in 1979 here comes this article about how the world was getting hotter. Claims were made like.;There will be no ice left in the Arctic Ocean. California will be under water. 'The planet is dying' And the people bought it.

Orwell is in his grave laughing today. Know what he said? 'The more people stray from the truth, the more they will hate those who tell it. '

Anyhow, this global warming agenda has been pushed on us like never before, and it is working. I call it a combination of mass hysteria and mass hypnosis. People are scared s*itless. I read Chicken Little as a kid. I had no idea how profound this story was.

I recently read that Lake Mead was drying up, that was last fall, but I read today, that it is flooding over.

They told us that we would perish within 10 years, and this was just 15 years ago.

So I note that in the last 50 years, not much has changed at all.

but the people still believe the lies. They think everyone is like them: Honest and not deceitful. Biden says 'The biggest threat to our survival is global warming, and the 'cannot think for myself' voted him in.

A lot of young people think we are headed to burn up any day now.

If you want to know what is going to very soon take place, read Matthew Chapter 24. Read Revelation.. It describes a political system, or conglomerate that suddenly conquers the whole world. That is when it starts. I believe this system is either the Vatican, OR a combination of CCP, W.H.O. and W.E.F. and Klaus' Schwab. Just mho. It's at the door

...at the end of this tribulation, is Armageddon. and then the return of Jesus Christ, and ... ok you got to read the rest yourself

and they call me stupid because I call them all liars and deceivers. You want to believe the hucksters, go ahead. but I still don't believe ONE WORD they are saying. NOT ONE WORD. and Sweet Greta T.. I will bet odds of 3 to one that she cannot tell what percent of the atmosphere is C Oh 2.

We are in the last days, though. In the last days all hell breaks out all over the world and a horrible tribulation that will last 7 years will unfold right under our noses. There will be a moral breakdown of society and people will (for the large part) will not know right from wrong .But.. the end is not yet

Meanwhile TUNE OUT terrorists like WHO and the alarmists. they add not a second to your life, and none of the stuff they predict has ever happened. L Ron Hubbard was a very wealthy cult leader..

Meanwhile, we are being 'conditioned' to take the Mark of the Beast.. the sheeple will take it, hook line and sinker. The get what sounds like skin cancer.

Call me an alarmist if you want. Just remember that you read it here

Only 17 years ago, THIS: On Jan. 25, 2006, Al Gore warned us that we had only “10 years to save the planet”! Our 10 years are up this coming Monday (actually, they were up 7 years ago) which means that if the former vice-president is right, in two days we’re going to have a “true planetary emergency.” Printed August 2016

Al isn’t the only celebrity who thinks fame is an acceptable substitute for knowledge. Back in 1989, noted oceanographer Ted Danson warned us that the oceans were going to die within 10 years, and when they died so would humanity. Several years after his prediction proved to be total bunk, Ted admitted that sometimes celebrities use hyperbole “to raise money and awareness” of important issues.

Look most celebs are either alcoholics or drug addicts. They cant stay married for more than 5 years, half of them drop dead before age 65,and people listen to them??? ROFL.

. But what about the United Nations? It’s supposed to be the repository for the world’s knowledge, isn’t it? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in 2007, reported that unless carbon emissions peak in 2015, the world is doomed. Well, we obviously didn’t make the deadline so, like I said, it’s been good to know ya’.

And people STILL believe these lying idiots. and just who is Ted Danson, anyhow? Another Hollywood eff up

HOWEVER, some of these guys made MILLIONS of dollars on the sales of the books they wrote

And we are the suckers. you still believe them? So much for 'blind faith'

Cheers (that;s for Ted)

Posted by Lennybruce26 on 7/11/2023 11:17:00 PM (view original):
So I looked at the chart. I have no idea what it is or means. I congratulate you on the academia but what does a masters in genetics have to do with climatology.
I think you went way way way overboard in using a chart posted by a bagadocuous chucker and giving it some magic power of this is wrong and this they are all a bunch of idiots….whatever the hell the chart purports it is.

Dog Mo is to try to trick someone into saying something he can exploit and then say he says it stands for all of them and thus they are all wrong.
He can’t find his bone and he is still looking.

im onto the conservative type of games he does.
the conservative pols spend all of their time with those types of cynical divisive games.

Genetics has nothing to do with Climatology.

The proper way to present statistical data for scientific journals and academic research is the same no matter if the field is genetics, climatology, biology, chemistry, astronomy, physics, etc. Data is data, discipline is irrelevant. If you want to accept garbage like that as good scientific work, all the power to you.

One final thought. That graph is so bad, a conservative like Doug could have made it to make fun of your sincere beliefs and to see if you would take the bait.

So, Doug is employing the Rules for Radicals technique? Interesting.

i especially loved the mad magazine folds between epochs

........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
............//...
..........//.....
....... //.......
......//.........
....//...........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........
........|........

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/11/2023 11:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Lennybruce26 on 7/11/2023 11:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/11/2023 10:48:00 PM (view original):
A few more quick hits.

L. Ron Hubbard refers to the chart maker, not bags.

Intellectual has nothing to do with intelligence. It means using rational thought processes rather than emotional ones to reach a conclusion.

That graph is designed to only elicit an emotional response since it has no scientific value.

The studies embedded in the graph (Zachos et al, etc.) I would guess are actual peer reviewed scientific articles. The chart itself was probably made by a Scientologist who lives in his mother's basement and talks to God through his flatulence.

Fair enough - I didn’t even bother to look at the chart but whatever it says what leads you to extrapolate that if proves that mostly libs are not serious .

Expressed myself poorly.

Both sides are so full of sh*t that they probably have a hard time telling what's real and what is not real. That graph was pure propaganda. It could have been constructed in a way to actually convey meaning but my guess is that it was intentionally created to have incorrect content to flame passions on one side of the debate...like a staged frontier incident that is then used to declare war.

However, the Right does the same exact nonsense...playing the same exact game. They make up their own overt lies out of whole cloth and their army of useful idiots then goes about creating "conservative" nonsensical graphs depicting absolutely nothing just like the one bags posted.

My disgust goes in both directions.

Again - who made the graph - leaving aside whether or not the graph is good or not WHY do you insist that it be a definitive reorientation of “the left” or the “right” that’s where you totally lose me.

point to legislative efforts in federal congress - ok

Posted by gomiami1972 on 7/12/2023 9:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Lennybruce26 on 7/11/2023 11:17:00 PM (view original):
So I looked at the chart. I have no idea what it is or means. I congratulate you on the academia but what does a masters in genetics have to do with climatology.
I think you went way way way overboard in using a chart posted by a bagadocuous chucker and giving it some magic power of this is wrong and this they are all a bunch of idiots….whatever the hell the chart purports it is.

Dog Mo is to try to trick someone into saying something he can exploit and then say he says it stands for all of them and thus they are all wrong.
He can’t find his bone and he is still looking.

im onto the conservative type of games he does.
the conservative pols spend all of their time with those types of cynical divisive games.

Genetics has nothing to do with Climatology.

The proper way to present statistical data for scientific journals and academic research is the same no matter if the field is genetics, climatology, biology, chemistry, astronomy, physics, etc. Data is data, discipline is irrelevant. If you want to accept garbage like that as good scientific work, all the power to you.

One final thought. That graph is so bad, a conservative like Doug could have made it to make fun of your sincere beliefs and to see if you would take the bait.

So, Doug is employing the Rules for Radicals technique? Interesting.

I could care less about a graph that nobody even knows where it came from.