Global warming?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Coign

They are peer reviewed. ... And cherry picking? 900 papers is cherry picking?

Peer reviewed like hundreds of papers that prove digitalis rectalitis in Danon Yogurt increases health. Like those hundreds of papers from the cigarette industry that proved smoking increases health. Peer reviewed by science - or by organizations set up using principles also used by the Nazis in 1930s.

Yes, a perfect example of cherry picking. Worse, you cannot even summarize what each paper says. Also says you are lying even to yourself. Your posts are devoid of numbers – a third symptom of one easily manipulated by propaganda techniques that Hitler also used to prove Jews are vermin. Same logic also proved Saddam had WMDs. Your entire reasoning: others said it was true; so it must be true. Classic 'brainwashing by soundbyte'.

They jumped on Muller as if he would save their empty claims with numbers. Rushed him into Congressional testimony for political reasons. Never bothered to learn what he was saying because it was too scientific; involved numbers. They only heard half of what he said. Sufficient to prove he was going to dispute global warming. Were shocked when he testified before the House committee using science – that global warming does exist and has been well researched. Curious. Your reasoning is to ignore that reality. Is it ignorance or denial? Either way, your credibility is further diminished by another problem - no numbers. Not posting numbers and technical summary means you are insulting other’s intelligence.

'Brainwashing by soundbyte': X says it is so ... so it must be true. You don't even demonstrate a grasp of basic science concepts; only recite political spin so popular among extremists politicians (ie Limbaugh).

We suffered your reasoning previously in Global warming?. Tsonis’ simulation proved global *cooling* was ongoing. Posted because that is what spin told all to believe. Posted because what Tsonis said was completely ignored. It was too complex. Had numbers. So spin doctors dumbed it all down.

Tsonis' paper was about a new simulation technique that maybe only applies to weather changed anthropogenically. Credibility is in the mathematics of his simulation - not in the simulation's result. But those two sentences were too hard to grasp. You are doing same with 900 papers. Cited because what 900 papers said was completely ignored. It was too complex. Had numbers. So spin doctors dumbed it all down for you.

Your every post only says, “X told me what to believe; so it must be true.” A perfect example of 'brainwashing by soundbyte'. How does digitalis rectalitis improve digestion? Danon said it does citing hundreds of peer reviewed papers. So you also believe it. Using your logic, Danon must be honest.

The trends and reasons for global warming are obvious, well proven, and not disputed (except by spin doctors and extremists). Some details remain unknown for the same reasons we are also unsure of the moon's orbit. Somehow that spin proves global warming does not exist? According to your logic, we also do not know where the moon will be next month.

You could not insult educated people more with that Limbaugh logic.