Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
MIT Study: No Scientific Consensus On Global Warming Crop Impact
Topic Started: Aug 14 2016, 08:46 AM (976 Views)
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Thumper
Aug 15 2016, 11:45 AM
Fulltimer
Aug 15 2016, 04:26 AM
You sir, are an asshole. Why you are tolerated here is beyond me. You need therapy big time.
He is tolerated because he has the tenacity to invest the wild claims by our racist liberals to expose their stupidity and bull crap.
When did he ever do that?

Calling someone a "Liar" while not adding a single bit of real information in return does very little to expose anything.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
He put Fulltimer in the shed with real information in the "non political" thread when Fulltimer faked his own knowledge. Which seem to be the case with most Canadians.
Edited by Berton, Aug 15 2016, 09:27 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Aug 14 2016, 09:35 AM
Gee - the Daily Caller! Backed up by CATO! Of course every Climate Scientist must be dead wrong!

The most hilarious part of the whole OP is that the only two links buried in the report both completely disagree with what the Caller is saying! It's pretty obvious that they have thoroughly misunderstood MIT's report!

(You did notice that the OP never actually quoted the MIT report, didn't you?)

Total Bullship as usual from another member of the good ol' RWEC!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
So now MIT scientists are dumb a**es?

The goalpost moves again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]

He does that a lot, like when he said the drought in the Great Plains would never end.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ImaHeadaU
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Aug 16 2016, 12:02 AM
Brewster
Aug 14 2016, 09:35 AM
Gee - the Daily Caller! Backed up by CATO! Of course every Climate Scientist must be dead wrong!

The most hilarious part of the whole OP is that the only two links buried in the report both completely disagree with what the Caller is saying! It's pretty obvious that they have thoroughly misunderstood MIT's report!

(You did notice that the OP never actually quoted the MIT report, didn't you?)

Total Bullship as usual from another member of the good ol' RWEC!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
So now MIT scientists are dumb a**es?

The goalpost moves again.
Did Brewster say that the "MIT scientists are dumb a**es"?

No.

In fact he quoted them directly, something the piece in the OP didn't do. I'll repeat that quote for you.

Quote:
 
The predictions are very robust, and more than 75% of the counties in our sample show a statistically significant effect, ranging from moderate gains to large losses, with losses in the aggregate that can become quite large under scenarios involving sustained heavy use of fossil fuels.
The Impact of Global Warming on U.S. Agriculture: An Econometric Analysis of Optimal Growing Conditions

This contradicts the interpretation put forward in the OP.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Aug 16 2016, 12:02 AM
Brewster
Aug 14 2016, 09:35 AM
Gee - the Daily Caller! Backed up by CATO! Of course every Climate Scientist must be dead wrong!

The most hilarious part of the whole OP is that the only two links buried in the report both completely disagree with what the Caller is saying! It's pretty obvious that they have thoroughly misunderstood MIT's report!

(You did notice that the OP never actually quoted the MIT report, didn't you?)

Total Bullship as usual from another member of the good ol' RWEC!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
So now MIT scientists are dumb a**es?

The goalpost moves again.
Pat, you're getting nearly as bad at deliberately misunderstanding what's posted as the Bobbsey Twins.
Edited by Brewster, Aug 16 2016, 03:06 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Aug 16 2016, 03:06 AM
Pat
Aug 16 2016, 12:02 AM
Brewster
Aug 14 2016, 09:35 AM
Gee - the Daily Caller! Backed up by CATO! Of course every Climate Scientist must be dead wrong!

The most hilarious part of the whole OP is that the only two links buried in the report both completely disagree with what the Caller is saying! It's pretty obvious that they have thoroughly misunderstood MIT's report!

(You did notice that the OP never actually quoted the MIT report, didn't you?)

Total Bullship as usual from another member of the good ol' RWEC!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
So now MIT scientists are dumb a**es?

The goalpost moves again.
Pat, you're getting nearly as bad at deliberately misunderstanding what's posted as the Bobbsey Twins.
Brew, in my opinion, you and the global warming school of thought, ignore or give far too little respect to the natural causes to climate change. You are focused on fossil fuel and their affects on civilization, and you will not take into full account the natural affects that counter any man made affects. I happen to believe that it's possible that we benefit from any warming attributed to man's causal affect. Especially given that scientists are now attributing the sun's phase it has entered, as being linked to an ice age. Any warming could block such a catastrophic event.

When I or others bring up scientific studies, they are ignored or attacked by you because in my opinion, or have so much invested emotionally in your hypothesis that to have it countered with another plausible outcome is to hard for you to accept. I have followed the various threads and posts surrounding this topic and done my own research, and I have come to a different conclusion than you. Whether you accept this or not does not change one iota the truth. Scietism is not going to win a debate or discussion. Which is what i see going on here.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
 
When I or others bring up scientific studies, they are ignored or attacked by you because in my opinion, or have so much invested emotionally in your hypothesis that to have it countered with another plausible outcome is to hard for you to accept.
Bullship. Pat, I am willing to accept all plausible theories.

But I am not willing to accept any old idea that comes down the pike with no support from the Scientific community at large, particularly when the site posting it lies about what the original report says, (Easily proven as I did, by digging up the original report) and then links to other sites which also disagree with the site's conclusion.

A theory that begins with lying about its source then tries to back up its lie with sources that prove it's lying hardly counts as plausible.

Pat, YOU are the one who has invested far too much emotional capital - but not in genuine science, in your Personal Political Mantra.
Edited by Brewster, Aug 16 2016, 04:46 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I would say Pat's point was just made. LOL
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
And you have just shown you have NOTHING but a Political Mantra.

You don't care if the source lies, do you,Neut?

As long as it says what you want it to say, the truth is irrelevant...

Oh, have I hurt your widdle feelings again? :cry:

What an awful person I am... :banghead:
Edited by Brewster, Aug 16 2016, 05:00 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis