(01-03-2017 05:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 05:44 PM)dfarr Wrote:  http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/12/30/m...cleans-up/

Dude appears to have a clue and the necessary credentials.

Every medical doctor has a M.D. or D.O.

Doesn't mean they're infallible. I can find bad predictions made by good scientists, good predictions made by bad scientists, and crackpot opinions held by otherwise trustworthy individuals. If science rested entirely on one or even a handful of data points, I don't know where we'd be today.

Probably not communicating through the internet.

Infallible? Well, of course not. BUT, Alfred Sloan endowed seat and National Academy of Sciences member from MIT?

I'd say his voice should carry some weight, and certainly NO ONE should really ever be making claims about "settled science", that's just stupid.

(01-03-2017 06:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 05:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 05:44 PM)dfarr Wrote:  http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/12/30/m...cleans-up/

Dude appears to have a clue and the necessary credentials.

Every medical doctor has a M.D. or D.O.

Doesn't mean they're infallible. I can find bad predictions made by good scientists, good predictions made by bad scientists, and crackpot opinions held by otherwise trustworthy individuals. If science rested entirely on one or even a handful of data points, I don't know where we'd be today.

Probably not communicating through the internet.

Infallible? Well, of course not. BUT, Alfred Sloan endowed seat and National Academy of Sciences member from MIT?

I'd say his voice should carry some weight, and certainly NO ONE should really ever be making claims about "settled science", that's just stupid.

MIT and other elite schools are no exception. There are Ivy League scientists that think evolution is bullsh!t, they're just rare.

In 2004, Lindzen bet that the earth would be "cooler in 20 years than it is today".

Now it's not quite 2024 yet, but all signs point to it being a bad prediction.

(01-03-2017 06:28 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 06:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 05:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 05:44 PM)dfarr Wrote:  http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/12/30/m...cleans-up/

Dude appears to have a clue and the necessary credentials.

Every medical doctor has a M.D. or D.O.

Doesn't mean they're infallible. I can find bad predictions made by good scientists, good predictions made by bad scientists, and crackpot opinions held by otherwise trustworthy individuals. If science rested entirely on one or even a handful of data points, I don't know where we'd be today.

Probably not communicating through the internet.

Infallible? Well, of course not. BUT, Alfred Sloan endowed seat and National Academy of Sciences member from MIT?

I'd say his voice should carry some weight, and certainly NO ONE should really ever be making claims about "settled science", that's just stupid.

MIT and other elite schools are no exception. There are Ivy League scientists that think evolution is bullsh!t, they're just rare.

In 2004, Lindzen bet that the earth would be "cooler in 20 years than it is today".

Now it's not quite 2024 yet, but all signs point to it being a bad prediction.

Oh, come on. You wanna go down the prediction path? Good grief, we've been hearing about mass starvation, global warming, climate chaos, the coming ice age, California falling into the sea, running out of oil and a gazilllion other things for ever now. ALL predictions are subject to being wrong.

Hell, just in the past 3 months I've had to endure listening to dozens of "experts" telling me my Vikings would make the playoffs... So, yea. Unless you can show me this guy is some kind of a crackpot, as you seem to be suggesting, then as I said, I think his voice should carry some weight.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical when dealing with science and "absolutes".

(01-03-2017 07:01 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 06:28 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 06:15 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 05:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 05:44 PM)dfarr Wrote:  http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/12/30/m...cleans-up/

Dude appears to have a clue and the necessary credentials.

Every medical doctor has a M.D. or D.O.

Doesn't mean they're infallible. I can find bad predictions made by good scientists, good predictions made by bad scientists, and crackpot opinions held by otherwise trustworthy individuals. If science rested entirely on one or even a handful of data points, I don't know where we'd be today.

Probably not communicating through the internet.

Infallible? Well, of course not. BUT, Alfred Sloan endowed seat and National Academy of Sciences member from MIT?

I'd say his voice should carry some weight, and certainly NO ONE should really ever be making claims about "settled science", that's just stupid.

MIT and other elite schools are no exception. There are Ivy League scientists that think evolution is bullsh!t, they're just rare.

In 2004, Lindzen bet that the earth would be "cooler in 20 years than it is today".

Now it's not quite 2024 yet, but all signs point to it being a bad prediction.

Oh, come on. You wanna go down the prediction path? Good grief, we've been hearing about mass starvation, global warming, climate chaos, the coming ice age, California falling into the sea, running out of oil and a gazilllion other things for ever now. ALL predictions are subject to being wrong.

Hell, just in the past 3 months I've had to endure listening to dozens of "experts" telling me my Vikings would make the playoffs... So, yea. Unless you can show me this guy is some kind of a crackpot, as you seem to be suggesting, then as I said, I think his voice should carry some weight.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical when dealing with science and "absolutes".

At the risk of upsetting you, Fit owns the Vikings. Therefore they're "his" Vikings, not yours.

Just sayin'.

(01-03-2017 06:02 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 02:09 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 02:03 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-03-2017 01:00 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  "Libturd" is a combination of "liberal" and "retard". If someone wanted to combine "libertarian" and "retard", "liberturd" would probably be the correct from.

No, it's a combination of "Libertarian" and "turd" (as in a piece of stool). It's an very lowbrow, crude insult of Libertarians on this board.

No.

Quote:Libturd
Combination of Liberal and turd. A Libturd is generally referring to politically left leaning to extreme left leaning person that believes their liberal view points are the only valid view points and anyone that disagrees with them is a fundie and belongs to the Religious Right.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Libturd


Anything else you would like to be wrong about today?

Guys,

No one else listens to any of the other foolishness he/she says, why play into this stupidity by even responding? We all know what it means, who cares if whoever this is thinks they're being "clevah".

Because it's fun to watch stupidity and ignorance on display. I get a certain level of enjoyment out of watching train-wrecks and bison is like a 200-car derailment every time she types something.