Author Topic: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread (Read 437969 times)

ednksu · « **Reply #2075 on:** April 19, 2016, 12:59:50 PM »

Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on April 19, 2016, 12:49:01 PM

The subject matter of the quotes is the usefulness of the models. You say that's been proven wrong. I guess that fits the thread title, but not your haphazard kitchen sink posts in this thread.

You should strive to become coherent.

You are trying so hard, aren't you?

And no, when the quote is wrong about rejecting the model, it doesn't really fit the thread title.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #2076 on:** April 20, 2016, 12:13:31 PM »

In Co Her Ent

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #2077 on:** April 20, 2016, 12:28:31 PM »

Quotes have no expiration date, and Parrot Boy Whackadoodle apparently doesn't realize that it's modeling that's driving the draconian climate/energy decisions along with the constant meddling in historical temperature data.

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #2078 on:** April 20, 2016, 12:33:41 PM »

I know Parrot Boy Whackadoodle won't like this because it's not from one of his far left preapproved propaganda sources, but this just outlines one small segment of the witch hunt that's undertaken against scientists who don't tow the line.

http://blog.heartland.org/2016/04/a-few-facts-for-climate-alarmists-waging-war-against-astrophysicist-willie-soon/

ednksu · « **Reply #2079 on:** April 20, 2016, 12:56:41 PM »

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on April 20, 2016, 12:28:31 PM

Quotes have no expiration date, and Parrot Boy Whackadoodle apparently doesn't realize that it's modeling that's driving the draconian climate/energy decisions along with the constant meddling in historical temperature data.

how do you explain the never before seen loss of ice packs, since it's in no way related to warming.

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #2080 on:** April 20, 2016, 01:56:37 PM »

Per edna, the oceans had to have been solid ice up and until humans started building camp fires thousands of years ago.

ChiComCat · « **Reply #2081 on:** April 20, 2016, 02:09:59 PM »

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on April 20, 2016, 12:33:41 PM

I know Parrot Boy Whackadoodle won't like this because it's not from one of his far left preapproved propaganda sources, but this just outlines one small segment of the witch hunt that's undertaken against scientists who don't tow the line.

http://blog.heartland.org/2016/04/a-few-facts-for-climate-alarmists-waging-war-against-astrophysicist-willie-soon/

Seriously? What a terrible article. Sounds like a great idea for a story which is a shame.

john "teach me how to" dougie · « **Reply #2082 on:** April 20, 2016, 03:03:57 PM »

Government funded research = good

Private funded research = bad

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2083 on:** April 20, 2016, 03:31:47 PM »

Biased big oil "research" =

Non-bias research from multiple funding sources from around the world =

john "teach me how to" dougie · « **Reply #2084 on:** April 20, 2016, 03:44:20 PM »

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on April 20, 2016, 03:31:47 PM

Non-bias research from multiple funding sources from around the world =

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2085 on:** April 20, 2016, 03:45:01 PM »

It's all a big conspiracy

john "teach me how to" dougie · « **Reply #2086 on:** April 20, 2016, 03:52:25 PM »

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on April 20, 2016, 03:45:01 PM

It's all a big conspiracy

I'll give you $10 million government grant if you can prove it is. You can keep your research private, too.

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2087 on:** April 20, 2016, 04:25:28 PM »

randomdaxbloglink.net

$10 million plz

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #2088 on:** April 20, 2016, 08:11:30 PM »

Lib7, you look delusional when you make that argument.

star seed 7 · « **Reply #2089 on:** April 20, 2016, 08:14:15 PM »

Conspiracys aren't delusional at all

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #2090 on:** April 20, 2016, 08:54:14 PM »

No, the other argument

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #2091 on:** April 21, 2016, 10:32:48 AM »

Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on April 20, 2016, 03:31:47 PM

Biased big oil "research" =

Non-bias research from multiple funding sources from around the world =

No dumbass, just make the publicly funded research and researcher accountable in responding to FOIA etc. So their research which is driving actual policy can be analyzed.

steve dave · « **Reply #2092 on:** May 24, 2016, 11:57:26 AM »

what's up normal summer temp friends to the south

sys · « **Reply #2093 on:** May 24, 2016, 12:11:29 PM »

basically a map of areas god loves and areas he hates.

LickNeckey · « **Reply #2094 on:** June 13, 2016, 01:12:51 PM »

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/13/peabody-energy-coal-mining-climate-change-denial-funding

Nothing really new here but...

slobber · « **Reply #2095 on:** June 13, 2016, 01:21:06 PM »

Quote from: LickNeckey on June 13, 2016, 01:12:51 PM

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/13/peabody-energy-coal-mining-climate-change-denial-funding

Nothing really new here but...

Who are they supposed to fund? I would wager that those with the opposite view are not funding the same people/groups/politicians/trade organizations that Peabody is funding.

Royals aren't gonna win 'em all

bubbles4ksu · « **Reply #2096 on:** June 13, 2016, 03:24:19 PM »

Funding research is different than funding lobbyists.

slobber · « **Reply #2097 on:** June 13, 2016, 03:28:56 PM »

Quote from: bubbles4ksu on June 13, 2016, 03:24:19 PM

Funding research is different than funding lobbyists.

Then why are they all lumped together? Do you not think the opposing side has lobbyists?

Royals aren't gonna win 'em all

bubbles4ksu · « **Reply #2098 on:** June 13, 2016, 03:37:15 PM »

Quote from: slobber on June 13, 2016, 03:28:56 PM

Quote from: bubbles4ksu on June 13, 2016, 03:24:19 PM
Funding research is different than funding lobbyists.
Then why are they all lumped together? Do you not think the opposing side has lobbyists?

Royals aren't gonna win 'em all

Sure, there are organizations like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club that get private money, but money also goes to universities and organizations legitimately interested in observing and predicting the climate. Exxon and Peabody aren't putting in that work, they're hiring spin doctors.

LickNeckey · « **Reply #2099 on:** June 13, 2016, 05:00:10 PM »

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk