bpwallace49 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 Have to agree here . . independent agency goes over e-mails and finds ZERO tampering! Have to agree here!! I mean . . . Have to agree here! What will Foxulists talk about today?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 Have to agree here . . independent agency goes over e-mails and finds ZERO tampering! Have to agree here!! I mean . . . Have to agree here! What will Foxulists talk about today?? What are the chances that Perch, Az, and all the other locksteppers admit how wrong they were? Maybe in the future they won't be so easily manipulated into blowing the trumpet for the next BS right wing political ploy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 What are the chances that Perch, Az, and all the other locksteppers admit how wrong they were? Maybe in the future they won't be so easily manipulated into blowing the trumpet for the next BS right wing political ploy. Not a prayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 What are the chances that Perch, Az, and all the other locksteppers admit how wrong they were? Maybe in the future they won't be so easily manipulated into blowing the trumpet for the next BS right wing political ploy. If the line is set at zero . . . I take the under. Which means they will bluster and rant about how it still all lies and deception by Al Gore to warn against ManBearPig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Yea I believe everything MSNBC reports on. And to think, one of the authors of that crap believes Obama is Mr. Spock That makes this story more comical if anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 (edited) Yea I believe everything MSNBC reports on. It's an Associated Press release being posted by multiple news agencies. The participants of an independent study came to the conclusion, not MSNBC. A lot of you guys are going into full blown "moon landing was faked" conspiracy type behavior in order to defend your political mantra. Edited December 13, 2009 by bushwacked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There's global warming...in my pants! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There's global warming...in my pants! With a divingboard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady.hawke Posted December 13, 2009 Author Share Posted December 13, 2009 There is more information here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...-send-them.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There is more information here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...-send-them.html There is a saying that "When you are in a hole stop digging!". I always had a lot of respect for you, but your latest rants are going no where. Please stop digging! Said by an oldtimer with nothing to do, perhaps, after midnite, but none the less please heed!. Peace rr26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 No that this thread is done. Lets start a new one. "Anyone know about ________________gate" or "Obama's speech about _______________" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Don't forget about the hockey stick. Can someone please explain the graphs to this simpleton. It looks like a very cyclical pattern to this untrained eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 It's an Associated Press release being posted by multiple news agencies. The participants of an independent study came to the conclusion, not MSNBC. A lot of you guys are going into full blown "moon landing was faked" conspiracy type behavior in order to defend your political mantra. What participants would that be? Reading the article,I found The American Association for the Advancement of Science.They've been a long time proponent of global warming.I found the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change-another proponent of global warming.The individual scientists mentioned are all Global Warming proponents as well.Just type their names in google and add global warming. This "independent study" seems to be nothing more than global warming proponents taking care of their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Have to agree here . . independent agency goes over e-mails and finds ZERO tampering! Have to agree here!! I mean . . . Have to agree here! What will Foxulists talk about today?? good grief. perhaps you should search the name of the author of that article (seth bornstein) against the leaked emails to see how truly "independent" he is. I'd like to see somebody try to respond to this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I'd like to see somebody try to respond to this A blog site? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 A blog site? Really? a blog by the guy that is at the center of all the "hockey-stick" controversy. good profile of him here. but whatever, your pathetic deflectionary non-response pretty well speaks for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar Magnolia Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There is more information here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...-send-them.html I refuse to read a link without you letting me know what I am linking to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 , your pathetic deflectionary non-response pretty well speaks for itself. Funny Az . . you are first to get personal when I ask if a blog is somehow "a credible source" when others dismiss research done by the Associated Press. Stay classy!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Funny Az . . you are first to get personal when I ask if a blog is somehow "a credible source" when others dismiss research done by the Associated Press. Stay classy!! getting personal? by pointing out that your non-response isn't particularly compelling? or maybe you are referring to this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 getting personal? by pointing out that your non-response isn't particularly compelling? or maybe you are referring to this If you want to talk issues . . talk issues. How about I call you self-promoting lionizing article by a Canadian source championing a Canadian non-scientist pathetic and deflectionary? BTW . . I cant believe that I didnt change Jstew for Dwill when doing lineups . . . .thats what I get for being in too many leagues and not paying attention . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 getting personal? by pointing out that your non-response isn't particularly compelling? or maybe you are referring to this Did you just try a rebuttal using a league for wine connoisseurs? Tickle fight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 If you want to talk issues . . talk issues. OK, here's the link again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 A blog site? Really? Can you dispute the info, or do you just dismiss the source of the info because it isn't the New York Slimes or MSNBC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 OK, here's the link again Soo . . . when these scientists are taking information from widely disparate sorces, and they are debating not only the meaning of data, but what the data represents, somehoe 5 e-mails out of thousands are cherry picked as they relate to one possible indicator while ignoring the other data points? is that your assertion? Cause it seems like climateologists are still finding ways to interpret the data they are gathering. It almost seems like you think that disagreements in the process of developing a theory or hypothesis are more important than the actual results. It seems like you are crying the world is flat because no one has shown you that the end of world doesnt exist yet . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Can you dispute the info, or do you just dismiss the source of the info because it isn't the New York Slimes or MSNBC? What info am I denying Perchie? You deny ANY news that disagrees with your very limited view of the world. Blogs tend to be the most unreliable and unproven "news" around. hence the question of "a blog? really?" If you want to post blogs, hang out with lady hawke . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts