Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
If you'd like to expand your comment about the context of junk science in the IPCC report, that would help us all to understand our obvious intellectual shortcomings.Unlike yourself,I remain unable to accomplish Vulcan mind-melds via a computer screen,and rarely have any idea what you're talking about.
Mostly,my experience from your posts are weaponized language in which there's rarely any actual information exchanged,just vitriol.It's quite tiresome.
If you want to urinate, defecate,push your chest out and beat on it,performing intellectual dominance rituals I suppose you're free to do so.
What would really be the deal-breaker for me though,would be for you to demonstrate a true intellectual command of the data.Reading doesn't qualify as understanding.
|
I cite specific portions of a report and you make vague excuses for the ipcc that don't seem to even apply to what I was talking about.
That's alright because in only about 300 pages I found 3 other inconsistencies I was saving incase we got past the first one.
Over all I like the ipcc a lot more since their very public, messy breakup with the dooms day climate cultists.
I for one want the ipcc to do air tight peer reviewed science.
I think that is the worst thing that could happen to the crazy climate nut jobs.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
|