Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

US


calfoxwc

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Back on this again are we? OK.

 

1) There is *literally* no source for this. I've spent half my lunch break searching but can't find anything. I'm not saying it's incorrect, but at the moment it's just a guy posting some numbers on his blog. I'd be a lot happier if I could see where they'd come from.

 

2) It's the US. Now, I know some Americans think the world consists entirely of America, but believe it or not it's actually quite a small amount of the earth - a shade under 2% of the surface. So when the report talks only about the US, it's a pretty inconsequential number. For example, because of the change in water and air currents, the gulf stream will move southwards, away from the UK, meaning we'll actually get colder.

 

I get why it's convenient to point at those numbers and keep on pretending like there's no problem, because it's presented in that way (right next to a donation button, I noticed...) and the added commentary, as well as the comments re-enforce that position. But please try to take a wider perspective on things like GLOBAL warming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet I can't seem to find any link to any data presented by the US HCN? Even from the original blog site?

 

I'm not saying it's not correct, I'm saying you can't just put up the numbers, tell people it's from a place, but give no source material. I'm not even wanting to trawl through the data myself to verify it, just know that it's there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously? That article is still referencing the original blog post.

 

I'm not being a 'hater' - I'm just asking for someone to cite their sources, not particularly outrageous in a case like this.

 

Snide? Maybe. But not in a malicious way. I expect better from you, and it's quite amusing seeing you failing to actually get any source material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again. That's an article about Arctic sea ice, where the original post was about US average temperatures. There's also no link to that article in the original. I even checked the source code for the website, to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, just how in the hell can ice in antarctica be EXPANDING all this time,

 

if the "earth has a fever"

 

Time to get off the "global warming vote dems" boat. It's sinking.

 

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet I can't seem to find any link to any data presented by the US HCN? Even from the original blog site?

 

I'm not saying it's not correct, I'm saying you can't just put up the numbers, tell people it's from a place, but give no source material. I'm not even wanting to trawl through the data myself to verify it, just know that it's there.

But remember Chris, we learned in a recent thread that if someone posts data, numbers, etc in a post, it's on the person that disagrees with them to prove it.

 

 

 

Also, was anyone else guessing "Heartland"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...we've moved on from the original article? :(

 

And well done for posting the same link twice. It's a different matter on polar sea ice, but generally the answer would be ice is moving from north to south pole as expected, and this article is only looking at the surface area of sea ice which again is expected to grow. Chunks of ice break away, break down in to smaller pieces, which then reconnected over a wider surface area.

 

Think of it like crushing an ice cube. You then put all the bits in your walk in freezer. It refreezes, covering a wider area, but there's less volume.

 

Anyway, I've got to go now, so hopefully someone else can answer any future questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then you go look it up like he did. It's on their giant site somewhere.

 

Because even if I did take the time, it wouldn't do any good.

It *absolutely* would make a difference. Like I said, I'm not disputing the numbers, but we have to be rigorous with citations, or we start opening the door to people fudging results to their own ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All wet in Egypt, still.

 

Gee, you have to go? Gosh, what great timing to refuse

to go look it up. I gave you plenty of help.

the trouble is, with citations, is that some of those who

get to give them, are the ones who have been manipulating

and cherry picking the data,

 

for al gore. You ...can....not....have....the "fever" bs...

 

with these numbers. Climate changes, flows and ebbs.

 

Hey, you "global warming" wonks lost it, and the proof

is when you changed the talking point to "climate change".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All wet in Egypt, still.

 

Gee, you have to go? Gosh, what great timing to refuse

to go look it up. I gave you plenty of help.

What's happening in Egypt then? I assumed it was a typo before.

 

Finish work at 5:30 every day, and don't post in the evenings. The point is, you shouldn't expect your readers to have to find the source material themselves, it should be linked for them. Not because they're lazy but to prove the integrity of the data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it hasn't. Comedy stays funny. It adapts, but is quite the same.

 

I think it was plato or aristotle, that said there are three elements

of comedy -

 

surprise, exaggeration, and irony. I'm only certain of the first two...

 

Thought you had to go. Don't tell me, you don't know how to google

"elements of comedy".......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But remember Chris, we learned in a recent thread that if someone posts data, numbers, etc in a post, it's on the person that disagrees with them to prove it.

 

 

 

Also, was anyone else guessing "Heartland"?

Does your butt hurt much? I posted a pie chart which by the way was more information than you deigned to post, which backed up my statement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does your butt hurt much? I posted a pie chart which by the way was more information than you deigned to post, which backed up my statement

I'm pretty sure you posted a pit chart containing data from the CDC, which I had already posted in that thread. Your claim was "99% from Retarded decisions" which that pie chart didn't prove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...