[Godstud]

Videos are not sources. They are shit. Post a study, not some twat's opinion.


Find the relevant information in this video..

[Hindsite]

Videos are not sources. They are shit. Post a study, not some twat's opinion.

A study is only an opinion that you can read.and are not as good as the videos because you can see and here the video just like this one:

God Bless Trump & the USA

[Godstud]

Video are simply information that you cannot access easily. You cannot search them for relevant information, and you don't even have the decency to point out the time whereas they support your idiotic opinions/beliefs.

[Hindsite]

Video are simply information that you cannot access easily. You cannot search them for relevant information, and you don't even have the decency to point out the time whereas they support your idiotic opinions/beliefs.

That is your responsibility, not mine. HalleluYah.

[Godstud]

So in short you don't provide any sources for your arguments, just immature infantile videos. OK, just so I have that clear. You actually don't have arguments, just beliefs.

Fucking idiotic is what that is.

[Sivad]

“How is it that the White House links changes in hurricanes today to global warming when the WMO, NOAA and IPCC cannot?” –Chris Landsea, Science and Operations Officer, NOAA’s National Hurricane Center

[Hindsite]

So in short you don't provide any sources for your arguments, just immature infantile videos. OK, just so I have that clear. You actually don't have arguments, just beliefs.

Fucking idiotic is what that is.

It is idiotic that you will not consider sources from Youtube that do not agree with your opinion. That means you are stuck in old written matter and are being left behind in a changing world of technology and discovery. Too bad for you. Global warming is not bad when we are recovering from an ice age. HalleluYah.

[Godstud]

Sources from Youtube, are weak. You cannot quote me one line that is important from the video, nor point to a place where it supports your view, so you assume I have hours of time to watch videos and find the place int hem where it supports your argument. That's idiotic. I am not going to make your arguments for you.

It's not about technology, which is based on science of which you are quite ignorant of, or dismiss regularly. It's about you finding biased sources on youtube.

Did you watch the 3, hour long videos I posted? I fucking doubt it! So if you won't watch what I post, why do you think I'd watch what you post?

Global warming is not bad when we are recovering from an ice age.

The Pleistocene Epoch(Ice Age) is typically defined as the time period that began about 2.6 million years ago and lasted until about 11,700 years ago. Don't start trying to use science to support your beliefs. You can't just cherry pick science when it suits you, and dismiss it when it doesn't.

Pleistocene Epoch: Facts About the Last Ice Age
https://www.livescience.com/40311-pleis ... epoch.html

[Hindsite]

The Pleistocene Epoch(Ice Age) is typically defined as the time period that began about 2.6 million years ago and lasted until about 11,700 years ago. Don't start trying to use science to support your beliefs. You can't just cherry pick science when it suits you, and dismiss it when it doesn't.

I was referring to the ice age after the world wide flood that still exists in part at the north and south poles of the earth. If you wish to believe all that nonsense about millions of years then that is up to you, but it is all just recent speculation from the last couple hundred years. Whereas the world wide flood is written history from many cultures over the earth dating back several thousand years. That is not so-called science, but fact. Praise the Lord.

[Godstud]

So yet again you dismiss science in favour of your fucked up religion, even after trying to use it as a defense to fight other science you don't like.

Don't even BOTHER discussing anything about science, because you don't KNOW anything about it.

[Hindsite]

So yet again you dismiss science in favour of your fucked up religion, even after trying to use it as a defense to fight other science you don't like.

Don't even BOTHER discussing anything about science, because you don't KNOW anything about it.

What you call "science" appears to be only speculation. You don't understand real science, because your "science" is a fairy tale belief.

[Godstud]

Science involves the scientific method. You don't understand what that is, because you say that science is all "speculation". It's not. They aren't always perfect, because we learn more about it every day, but it's not just "guessing" like what you have a 'determined'.

Making predictions based on past occurrences is not "fairy tale" stuff. They base the predictions on FACT, not tea leaves, or entrails.

Predicting Climate Change
Scientists have developed several computer-run simulations, or models, that combine and express in mathematical form what we know about the processes that control the atmospheric and hydrologic systems. The most advanced climate models are called General Circulation Models, or GCM's. These models are the primary tools used by scientists to try to predict the impacts of increased greenhouse gas concentration. The strength of these models is their ability to replicate input-response activities and relationships within complex systems that are far too elaborate for simple interpretation or logic. They have the ability to integrate various feedback processes in order to determine their effects on overall impact, and quickly generate different scenarios under varied assumptions about human activities.

A feedback can be defined as a direct result of a given process that either magnifies (positive feedback) or diminishes (negative feedback) the total effect of that very same process. One example of a positive feedback of global warming is the potential impact of increased concentration of water vapor in the atmosphere. As the oceans and atmosphere warm, the rate evaporation increases, causing more water vapor to accumulate in the atmosphere. As we noted earlier, water vapor is itself a greenhouse gas, causing even more heat to be trapped in the troposphere. Thus global warming is magnified by a result of its own existence.

[Hindsite]

Science involves the scientific method. You don't understand what that is, because you say that science is all "speculation". It's not. They aren't always perfect, because we learn more about it every day, but it's not just "guessing" like what you have a 'determined'.

I am not an uneducated fool as you seem to think for I learned the scientific method in school. That is why I doubt this global warming predictions as being real science. In computer science, there is a saying "garbage in, garbage out" and it holds true for other sciences as well.

[blackjack21]

Making predictions based on past occurrences is not "fairy tale" stuff. They base the predictions on FACT, not tea leaves, or entrails.

What difference does it make? Their predictions are always wrong and pretty much useless. Anyone can curve fit a model to past data, and repeat the process after the model fails to walk forward with anything of predictive significance. Wall Street quants do it all the time.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

To sum up: