starting strength gym
Page 46 of 66 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 659

Thread: Commentary #6: Global Warming

  1. #451
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    3,239

    Default

    • starting strength seminar december 2024
    • starting strength seminar february 2025
    • starting strength seminar april 2025
    Quote Originally Posted by Frivillesid View Post

    Also, once again, the point I am making is in regards to individuals complaining about social media and people being unable to think for themselves. These are the same people who are using social media to drive propaganda.
    Why don’t you defend an original thought about global warming without using social media or posting a link? Nothing too rigorous , just a general idea.

    It’s not that easy but it does demonstrate independent and creative thinking. It, and really only it, can serve as a basis for an argument. Pro tiips: Scientific consensus is not an argument and most original ideas are easily shown to be wrong.

  2. #452
    Join Date
    Jan 2024
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Charles View Post
    Why don’t you defend an original thought about global warming without using social media or posting a link? Nothing too rigorous , just a general idea.

    It’s not that easy but it does demonstrate independent and creative thinking. It, and really only it, can serve as a basis for an argument. Pro tiips: Scientific consensus is not an argument and most original ideas are easily shown to be wrong.
    Couple things here. First, I am not sure how you read what I just wrote and chose this as a response. Second, do you realize that everything that has been posted on here regarding the refutation of global warming is nothing more than a posted link from social media sites without the use of any critical thinking?

  3. #453
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mizuchi23 View Post
    Wal, did you forget that they get offended when people refer to them as BOM? They must be referred to by their full title or in short as The Bureau or something will happen.

    They've been wrong twice in a week for me. 5 degrees hotter than predicted a day beforehand. And 40% chance of rain today with no rain in sight. It's more accurate just to go outside and look up.
    Weather forecasting today appears no more accurate then it was reading it in the news papers back in the 1970's, before using computers, climate software and weather satellites. It all comes unstuck when they use algorithms which may guess correctly occasionally, but mostly ends up in confusion as what what happened with our BOM in its failure to work out if we were having an El Nino or La Nina event. I find that the daily weather a week out changes as the current day approaches so corrections are made daily so that the weather you receive on a particular day is as you say just as good as looking out the window. The best function a weather site is the rain radar at least you can see when raining is coming, but that is not relying on predictions,but current radar information.

    The BOM i.e. Bureau of Meteorology as they like to be called.

    Bureau of Meteorology or BoM: How Parkinson’s law of trivia exposed the bureaucracy in a name change

    More confusion

    BOM app update: How to decipher the new rainfall forecast - ABC News

    Why the farming community is angry with the BOM

    "Last Sunday, National Farmers Federation vice-president David Jochinke was startled to learn that the bureau would soon replace meteorologists who conduct around 700 scheduled local radio crosses each week with spokespeople to be known as “community information officers”.

    How the BoM failed to predict and warn NSW, Victoria of deadly floods, extreme weather


    I use these services, they are not 100%, but sometimes closer that the BOM

    Windy: Wind map & weather forecast, Yr, eldersweather.com.au/

  4. #454
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    54,948

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frivillesid View Post
    Couple things here. First, I am not sure how you read what I just wrote and chose this as a response. Second, do you realize that everything that has been posted on here regarding the refutation of global warming is nothing more than a posted link from social media sites without the use of any critical thinking?
    You goddamn idiot, can you not actually make a substantive argument about a point of contention? Who gives a fuck about social media if the media makes a valid point? The point is not rendered invalid just because it appeared on Yahoo! or MSNBC or the Heartland Institute -- it is rendered invalid by YOU. Do so, now, or go away.

  5. #455
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    3,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frivillesid View Post
    . Second, do you realize that everything that has been posted on here regarding the refutation of global warming is nothing more than a posted link from social media sites without the use of any critical thinking?
    Well here is something that was posted here without a single link to social media. Your claim is wrong.

    “One of the branch of physics I have direct experience with is radiation transfer and hydrodynamics. Both of these are deeply modeled with full experimental verification. The investment in these models is for the prediction of the performance and safety of nuclear weapons in the absence of testing real weapon's (test ban treaty).

    The supercomputers and the field of supercomputing is almost entirely a product of the US Nuclear weapons program. Has it been tempting to brand these exa and peta flop behemoths as multi purposed? Of course. The obvious is climate modeling. Dual use. Swords into plowshares.

    But the fact that climate modeling does occur and is funded doesn’t mean jack shit. Every aspect of nuclear weapon modeling is tested against old data AND verified using actual experiments. Climate modeling does neither, and, at best, overestimates the “bad” news.”

    If you or anyone wants to go into more detail it would be my pleasure. Or we can debate how well climate modeling works.

    In the meantime, can YOU defend an original thought?

  6. #456
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    758

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frivillesid View Post
    But when you are drawing flawed conclusions from the data collected so that you can post misinformation to social media to aid in the spread of the disinformation it becomes a problem. You cannot be this dense.

    Your browser is not supported | usatoday.com
    You originally stated that the source of the funding was a problem. Now you are are claiming that they are drawing false conclusions. Bring those goalposts back to my original question How does the source of funding to actually travel to those locations affect the observations of those locations?

  7. #457
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,253

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frivillesid View Post
    Second, do you realize that everything that has been posted on here regarding the refutation of global warming is nothing more than a posted link from social media sites without the use of any critical thinking?
    I don't think I posted anything from social media, perhaps from you tube which is bit of a garbage bin, but some good stuff does get through now and then. Most of if not all sites I posted are from reputable sources, I use don't twitter or face book, shit toc or such ilk. What is your opinion anyway about man made climate change?

    This guy Christopher Monckton is worth a listen.

    Lord Christopher Monckton | Global Warming is a Hoax - YouTube

    How Climate Miscalculations Have Misdirected Policy, Lord Christopher Monckton - YouTube

    Lord Monckton: Net Zero Emissions — The Costliest Error of Physics and of Economics in History - YouTube

  8. #458
    Join Date
    Jan 2023
    Posts
    155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Charles View Post
    Well here is something that was posted here without a single link to social media. Your claim is wrong.

    “One of the branch of physics I have direct experience with is radiation transfer and hydrodynamics. Both of these are deeply modeled with full experimental verification. The investment in these models is for the prediction of the performance and safety of nuclear weapons in the absence of testing real weapon's (test ban treaty).

    The supercomputers and the field of supercomputing is almost entirely a product of the US Nuclear weapons program. Has it been tempting to brand these exa and peta flop behemoths as multi purposed? Of course. The obvious is climate modeling. Dual use. Swords into plowshares.

    But the fact that climate modeling does occur and is funded doesn’t mean jack shit. Every aspect of nuclear weapon modeling is tested against old data AND verified using actual experiments. Climate modeling does neither, and, at best, overestimates the “bad” news.”

    If you or anyone wants to go into more detail it would be my pleasure. Or we can debate how well climate modeling works.

    In the meantime, can YOU defend an original thought?
    It cant, because its a bot. Probably some vastly overfunded government funded grant to research ways to "change the mind of the climate change deniers using AI"

  9. #459
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    54,948

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by golftdibrad View Post
    It cant, because its a bot. Probably some vastly overfunded government funded grant to research ways to "change the mind of the climate change deniers using AI"
    Well, I'm glad they turned it off.

  10. #460
    Join Date
    Jan 2023
    Posts
    155

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    A BITTERLY DISAPPOINTING VERDICT – Watts Up With That?

    They jury found in favor of Mann. How very disappointing.

Page 46 of 66 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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