Omg our elevators! They're Nazi elevators!
Get those nazi elevators out of there. Replace with Minnesota Elevator - MEI. Not nazi
global warming
- Thread starter Stu
- Start date
Get those nazi elevators out of there. Replace with Minnesota Elevator - MEI. Not nazi
Spot on. You just saved 10,000 American jobs. Put your stunna shades on.Get those nazi elevators out of there. Replace with Minnesota Elevator - MEI. Not nazi
Yeah lot of German Industries like Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz (a huge beneficiary of Nazi slave labour) benefited from their cooperation with the Nazi regime and were able to maximize their profits during the Nazi periodOmg our elevators! They're Nazi elevators!
American multinationals also financially benefited from their cooperation, the most recently documented is IBM.
Sorry it's not just "republicans" that have a problem with the political science used to "prove" man made global warming. It's thinking people that have a problem with it. Unless you want to say only Republicans think you are going to have a bit of an issue trying to push that shaky point.
And I bet you consider yourself a “thinking” person?
Granted, Sandie is generalizing...but the majority of deniers are generally more conservative and to the right of politics.
That is not untrue.
And your second sentence is once again - alluding that only people who “think” have a problem with it or are aware of the truth, and the non-thinking dumbass people just go along with it without doing any research of their own, bunch of sheeple.
Unnecessary insults inserted because why?
Do you know you are even doing it?
Just cut it out.
Whole fucking threads have tried to explain this to you.
*sigh*
Read my post. As i said unless someone is trying to allude to the idea only republicans think the whole point is completely meaningless. Whole "f&&&##&" threads as you have put it utilize no critical thinking skills instead choosing to simply follow a train of thought that fits into a narrative they like. What I find truly astounding is the complete abandonment of actual science. But not really, it's a plot that keeps playing over and over.
Oh and lastly, I clearly cause some sort of emotional stress in or for you. Dude, just block me already and live a happy life.
I’m not stressed, otherwise I would not talk to you or read your posts...I’m sure you think in your head you have that much effect on me.
For someone who claims to not even be a Republican you sure have thin skin when someone criticizes one, or a group of them.
Like you do over and over and over with liberals and Democrats.
What I’m saying is you are unnecessarily rude and you think are justified.
How’s that working for you?
Then once again you say that anyone who thinks differently has no “critical thinking skills...and “instead choosing to simply follow a train of thought that fits into a narrative they like”.
Then you go on to say - “What I find truly astounding is the complete abandonment of actual science.”
As if the narrative of the world possibly being destroyed is a fun narrative, and no one intelligent has looked into any scientific claims for themselves?
That is an illogical conclusion for an INTJ.
Just don’t be rude man.
You can say anything you wish that is contrary, in any thread, we all have that right...why be so abrasive to people?
Your conception of rude, malicious, benevolent etc is whatever it is. I'm not going to adjust my words to something you like. Otherwise I'll be here saying things like "man made global warming is real." You will never get that from me. You will never control what I say. Get used to that fact now and adjust your plan in accordance to that fact. If that means you block me than that's what it means. Please though stop telling me what to say or how to act. What you have to say in this regard is about as low down on my radar as anything can ever be.
I do not know how else to say it. I think it's on your best interest you block and forget about me.
Oh Christ.
I specifically said - I am not telling you what to say.
Not telling you how to think.
Asking you not to act rudely and abrasively to people...not just me, but @Sandie33 , @LittleLissa , @invisible , @Stu , @dang ...and anyone else I didn’t mention.
That’s it.
Otherwise, people will continue to react negatively to your slights and insults that are constants in your responses.
Likewise - I will not block you just because you tell me to, you don’t get to tell me to do that either...sorry.
I will continue to post in threads that are open to the forum.
I will answer your posts if there is something wrong with your information, or the facts are being misrepresented and I will do so without insulting or insinuating your lack of intelligence.
I will also point out when anyone insults or puts other people down on the forum.
So like you said - Get used to that fact now.
Last edited:
References
- IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers
B.D. Santer et.al., “A search for human influences on the thermal structure of the atmosphere,” Nature vol 382, 4 July 1996, 39-46
Gabriele C. Hegerl, “Detecting Greenhouse-Gas-Induced Climate Change with an Optimal Fingerprint Method,” Journal of Climate, v. 9, October 1996, 2281-2306
V. Ramaswamy et.al., “Anthropogenic and Natural Influences in the Evolution of Lower Stratospheric Cooling,” Science 311 (24 February 2006), 1138-1141
B.D. Santer et.al., “Contributions of Anthropogenic and Natural Forcing to Recent Tropopause Height Changes,” Science vol. 301 (25 July 2003), 479-483.
- In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first predicted that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.
- National Research Council (NRC), 2006. Surface Temperature Reconstructions For the Last 2,000 Years. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page3.php
- https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf
Church, J. A. and N.J. White (2006), A 20th century acceleration in global sea level rise, Geophysical Research Letters, 33, L01602, doi:10.1029/2005GL024826.
The global sea level estimate described in this work can be downloaded from the CSIRO website.
- https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp
- https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20170118/)
- Levitus, et al, "Global ocean heat content 1955–2008 in light of recently revealed instrumentation problems," Geophys. Res. Lett. 36, L07608 (2009).
- L. Polyak, et.al., “History of Sea Ice in the Arctic,” in Past Climate Variability and Change in the Arctic and at High Latitudes, U.S. Geological Survey, Climate Change Science Program Synthesis and Assessment Product 1.2, January 2009, chapter 7
R. Kwok and D. A. Rothrock, “Decline in Arctic sea ice thickness from submarine and ICESAT records: 1958-2008,” Geophysical Research Letters, v. 36, paper no. L15501, 2009
http://nsidc.org/sotc/sea_ice.html
- National Snow and Ice Data Center
World Glacier Monitoring Service
- "Attribution of Extreme Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change," National Academies Press, 2016
https://www.nap.edu/read/21852/chapter/1
Kunkel, K. et al, "Probable maximum precipitation and climate change," Geophysical Research Letters, (12 April 2013) DOI: 10.1002/grl.50334
Kunkel, K. et al, "Monitoring and Understanding Trends in Extreme Storms: State of the Knowledge," Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2012.
http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/cei.html
- http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification?
- http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification
- C. L. Sabine et.al., “The Oceanic Sink for Anthropogenic CO2,” Science vol. 305 (16 July 2004), 367-371
- Copenhagen Diagnosis, p. 36.
- National Snow and Ice Data Center
C. Derksen and R. Brown, "Spring snow cover extent reductions in the 2008-2012 period exceeding climate model projections," GRL, 39:L19504
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/snow_extent.html
Rutgers University Global Snow Lab, Data History Accessed August 29, 2011.
I think its in the best interest to your health that you block me.
You are right though it's certainly your choice. If you can move forward understanding you will never control what I say we may get along on more cordial terms.
The best interest of my health?
Is that a threat?
Or you are assuming you know best?
I already said I won’t tell you what to say....but I will chime in when you say it in a rude or insulting way.
I don’t care how you and I get along personally one bit.
He is pretending to be concerned about your mental state, it is a thinly veiled way of calling you a snowflake.
I’m aware of his slights...just more evidence of his inability to speak normally and in a non-arrogant manner.
But it is also quite close to what could be construed as a threat to me, and that is similarly unacceptable.
I made it very clear that he can say and do and think whatever he wants to think - just don’t put other people down and call them words like “ignorant” or alluding that they don’t use all of their brains and are not thinking logically or thinking at all.
And all I have ASKED, is that he doesn’t go out of his way to put people down.
I’m not sure that he even realizes that he is doing most of the time, and in spite of what people might think, I don’t dislike EH, nor do I think he isn’t intelligent.
I don’t agree with his political views, and vice-versa...but we are in a country that allows us to do so, and allows us to discuss it in a civil manner.
The put downs, the name calling, the slights - all detract from whatever point he is trying to make at the time and ultimately are to his own detriment.
Anyhow.
Back on topic now...personally I don’t think the pull out of the Paris accords will go through all the way like Trump thinks it will.
It won’t be fully implemented until 2020, and I have some serious doubts that he will be reelected (or make it all the way through the first term).
There are plenty of supporters who have offered to fund our portion of the bill and the only people who benefit from pulling out are corporations that want regulations rolled back.
So, dirtier air, dirtier water...as the EPA is also being gutted and is headed by a climate change denier.
We need to go ever further than the accord as it is anyhow.