Rutan on Global Warming

On Aug 10, 12:46*am, James Robinson wrote:
"Flaps_50!" wrote:
On Aug 9, 2:16*pm, "Dan Luke" wrote:
*It is tepid, equivocal and obviously written to appease members
who are violently opposed to the idea of AGW, while still not denying
the overwhelming scientific evidence for same. *

You need to remember that the only 'evidence' for AGW comes from
seriously flawed computer models. FACT

That is simply not a fact, in spite of your contention.

Data has been collected from core samples taken from glaciers on the rate
of temperature change over many thousands of years, and it has shown that
the earth's temperature has been increasing at a faster rate since the
industrial revolution than any other time in history. *That evidence
supports the fact that the rate of climate change has substantially
increased, contrary to your contention that there is no evidence. *The
question then becomes if this is simply normal climate change, but at an
extreme rate, or if humans activity has been the cause of the acceleration.

"DL" == Dan Luke writes:

DL Gosh, Burt Rutan is climate genius, too! He knows more than
DL the scientists. Impressive!

Who knew?! Next, Sarah Palin will give a speech on health care
policy.

--
If I could be a bird, I'd be a Flying Purple People Eater because
then people would sing about me and I could fly down and eat them
because I hate that song.
- Jack Handey

"Mike Granby" wrote in message
...

Anyone else see his Oshkosh tirade? Excellent stuff!


Global Warming, yet another pseudo-religion posing as science.

I suspect many here will find this interesting.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintAr...rticleId=14504

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...meta=&aq=f&oq=

Happy landings,

"Private" wrote in message
...
I suspect many here will find this interesting.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintAr...rticleId=14504

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...meta=&aq=f&oq=


See also
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121486841811817591.html

Happy landings,

Private wrote:
I suspect many here will find this interesting.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintAr...rticleId=14504

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...meta=&aq=f&oq=

Happy landings,



"An independent Media group of Writers, scholars and Activists"

(Their web description....)

Brian W

On Aug 8, 9:08*am, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Morgans" *wrote:
Dan, if you are as smart as you think you are, you would realize that the
two sides of this argument will never agree, and it does not matter what
proof you claim to have. *In result, you would just quit arguing, and move
on to a different subject, without caring who gets the last word.

The same thing could be said to the other people arguing with Dan.
--

Oh, you're right of course, Jim. *I've been in enough of these arguments
here and elswhere to know it's no longer an issue of facts with most people.

But a respected guy like Rutan spouting nonsense in public on a subject he
clearly does not understand is something I couldn't let pass without
comment.

I'll leave it with what I've posted so far; the others can claim victory if
they like.

Dan

T182T at 4R4

Just like Galileo, anyone who points out the inconsistencies and
errors in the "established knowledge" are being hounded and
villified. What's next -- someone who should know better telling them
to "shut up"?

Straight from Sol Alinsky, ignore the data and attack the people.

I'll take an empirical response using data over 1,000,000,000 opinions
any day of the week any month of the year.

"curtisgb" wrote in message
...
On Aug 8, 9:08 am, "Dan Luke" wrote:
"Morgans" wrote:
Dan, if you are as smart as you think you are, you would realize that the
two sides of this argument will never agree, and it does not matter what
proof you claim to have. In result, you would just quit arguing, and move
on to a different subject, without caring who gets the last word.

The same thing could be said to the other people arguing with Dan.
--

Oh, you're right of course, Jim. I've been in enough of these arguments
here and elswhere to know it's no longer an issue of facts with most people.

You wouldn't know a 'fact' if it bit you in the ass.


But a respected guy like Rutan spouting nonsense in public on a subject he
clearly does not understand is something I couldn't let pass without
comment.

I'll leave it with what I've posted so far; the others can claim victory if
they like.

Dan

Dan, the master of the logical fallacy (as he so aptly demonstrated).


:Just like Galileo, anyone who points out the inconsistencies and
: errors in the "established knowledge" are being hounded and
: villified. What's next -- someone who should know better telling them
: to "shut up"?

Calling them rapists of the planet? Calling them unAmerican?


:: Straight from Sol Alinsky, ignore the data and attack the people.

:: I'll take an empirical response using data over 1,000,000,000 opinions
:: any day of the week any month of the year.

Like, how it's demonstrated how CO2 follows temp increases rather than leading
them?

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in message
...

"Mike Granby" wrote in message
...

Anyone else see his Oshkosh tirade? Excellent stuff!


Global Warming, yet another pseudo-religion posing as science.


Yes, and that explains why it's collapsing so fast.

"curtisgb" wrote

Just like Galileo, anyone who points out the inconsistencies and
errors in the "established knowledge" are being hounded and
villified. What's next -- someone who should know better telling them
to "shut up"?

Straight from Sol Alinsky, ignore the data and attack the people.

I'll take an empirical response using data over 1,000,000,000 opinions
any day of the week any month of the year.

No, I would liken it to a comparison of the things you should not talk
about in a bar. Religion is one of them.

The simple fact remains that you will not find a single person reading this
thread changing their stance on believing or not believing in global
warming.

Then, the line about wresting with a pig comes in. You both get dirty, but
the pig enjoys it.

Am I wrong? Anyone reading this thread willing to admit that they have
substantially changed their views on global warming, from the information
presented in this thread? Anyone? Just one person?
--
Jim in NC