Leading Global Warming Skeptic changes mind after watching Al Gore Speak

[Ramona_A_Stone]

Pfft. Well, at least I got one of you fuckers to actually look at a website and learn a pretty new word, instead of standing there with a wrinkled nose going "NUH-UH" over and over because someone told you it was "unscientific."

Of course now you're an expert all over again. LOL.

As far as my explanation, from your own link:

One way to estimate the effect of the THC is to switch it off in coupled climate models (by adding a lot of freshwater to the northern Atlantic), and compare the surface climate before and after switching it off. Roughly, this leads to a cooling with a maximum of ~10K over the Nordic Seas (e.g., [12, 17]).

Another:

In quick summary, if enough cold, fresh water coming from the melting polar ice caps and the melting glaciers of Greenland flows into the northern Atlantic, it will shut down the Gulf Stream, which keeps Europe and northeastern North America warm.

[albed]

So all that heat stays in the tropics and part of the world gets warmer while another part gets cooler and you somehow make that into "global cooling".

Have you no reasoning ability at all?

[albed]

Originally Posted by Ramoa

I have no evidence that global warming is either occurring or not, nor do I know what the subsequent consequences of global warming would be.

MY POINT IS THAT NEITHER DO YOU.

And yet you've just insisted, again, that it's fallacy. Seems you're willing to gamble with the future of the planet. Based on what?

Common sense.

I can imagine you driving down the road and slamming on your brakes every 10 yards because someone might possibly pull into your path or cross into your lane and cause a crash. Even though there's no evidence, it still a possibility and being the irrational nutcase that you are, you think your behaviour is perfectly sensible and moreover that everyone should drive like you.

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by Ramona_A_Stone

Pfft. Well, at least I got one of you fuckers to actually look at a website and learn a pretty new word

You can't take credit for that. This is an issue I've studied since before multi started this thread. But this is a political forum and we're here to talk about our opinions. When I want to talk about the science behind this issue I normally go elsewhere to do it (it's a lot easier to do when people don't assume that your skepticism is politically driven). I don't come running to this place with links to every web page I read, it's not my mission to correct every factual mistake others post here, and I only did so yesterday because you were turning this valid scientific theory into sensationalist bullshit, it was embarrassing. You come to this discussion with no real understanding of the issue and then you have the gall to say that none of the rest of us understand it either? This is a side of you I've never seen before, Ramona. It's disappointing, I gotta tell ya.

[Ramona_A_Stone]

Wow, I feel really bad to be the one responsible for bringing the intellectual caliber of this forum so far down. Suppose I should just let you and your egghead conservative science critic buddies get back to jokes about the weather and asserting that global warming can't exist because Al Gore's electric bill is so high and other real science. And I would like to apologize unreservedly for stooping to the sensationalist bullshit of maintaining that data pertaining to the consequences of global warming are inconclusive.

I usually go elsewhere for an intelligent discussion myself. It's not just easier to do when people don't assume that your skepticism is politically driven, it's possible.

[Nicobie]

Originally Posted by Ramona_A_Stone

I would like to apologize unreservedly for stooping to the sensationalist bullshit of maintaining that data pertaining to the consequences of global warming are inconclusive.

Well, even though I never expected it, that's big of you and probably right too.

[Mazer]

I forgive you, Ramona.

[albed]

I'd like to think Ramona learned something from this thread, but I'd just be kidding myself.

[Ramona_A_Stone]

Well, clearly I already knew that some are so preoccupied with their fanatical aversion to any and every idea which alludes to anything occurring on a "global" scale that this argument would be completely futile for their sake. I also pretty much already guessed that the concept of inconclusiveness would be entirely alien to those who choose to dwell exclusively in one half of a world which is defined primarily by an inexorable political polarity.

I think I did however learn that one should always use the :sarcasm: tag around here, even when you're sure no one will miss it.

And I would like to apologize unreservedly for stooping to the sensationalist bullshit of maintaining that data pertaining to the consequences of global warming are inconclusive.

.