or you could say this, from weather.comQuote:
Originally Posted by altadawg
"Still watching a few areasThunderstorms south of Florida and in the Caribbean are currently showing no signs of any organization."
Printable View
or you could say this, from weather.comQuote:
Originally Posted by altadawg
"Still watching a few areasThunderstorms south of Florida and in the Caribbean are currently showing no signs of any organization."
Alta posts on this thread with EVERY tropical depression. Makes it sound like it will be a CAT 100 storm by the time it hits, all because of global warming. :rolleyes4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog13
Never posts a correction to say he was wrong.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007...same_thing.phpQuote:
Originally Posted by Bigdog13
Sorry, try again. The judge didnt say there were nine errors. This is just a case of shoddy journalism.
The guy who brought the suit had laid out several of what he thought were errors, and the judge decided only 9 of those 'errors' had any substance. (Note the quotation marks. That means the judge isnt calling them errors, he is referring to them in the context of the suit...There's that nasty word "context" again that republicans hate so much)
From the judge's ruling:
The judge didnt agree that they were errors. Just that those were the only 9 that could even possibly be errors, maybe, and werent given enough evidence in the film to be proven 100& true.Quote:
Mr Downes produced a long schedule of such alleged errors or exaggerations and waxed lyrical in that regard. It was obviously helpful for me to look at the film with his critique in hand.
In the event I was persuaded that only some of them were sufficiently persuasive to be relevant for the purposes of his argument, and it was those matters - 9 in all - upon which I invited Mr Chamberlain to concentrate. It was essential to appreciate that the hearing before me did not relate to an analysis of the scientific questions, but to an assessment of whether the 'errors' in question, set out in the context of a political film, informed the argument on ss406 and 407. All these 9 'errors' that I now address are not put in the context of the evidence of Professor Carter and the Claimant's case, but by reference to the IPCC report and the evidence of Dr Stott.
Hardly an unbiased article right there. That judge is considered a very liberal judge and he is still requiring a disclamier be read to students that are about to watch Gores propaganda film.Quote:
Originally Posted by daybreaker2
from that article:Quote:
Originally Posted by DogtorEvil
Sorry, this has already been proven false. Once again, this is the shoddy journalism I was talking about. They dont read what the judge ACTUALLY said, they read what they WANTED the judge to have said.Quote:
. Two days before, a British judge ruled that Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth," contained so many errors (read: lies) that it could be shown in British public schools only if accompanied by a fact sheet correcting the errors.
They werent errors OR lies. They were areas where there is not enough evidence provided to verify the claim. The "fact sheet" doesnt "correct" these "errors", it merely says that there isnt enough evidence to call it an undisputed fact. HUGE DIFFERENCE.
But I guess the right wing media would never lie or distort the truth, because apparently there is no right wing media, and only liberals lie.
WOW! Another article by Dr. William Gray. Who woulda thunk?Quote:
Originally Posted by DogtorEvil
Seriously, can you all put up anything outside of Senator Inofe and William Gray to defend your disbelief in Manmade GW?
Stating something as fact that isn't fact is a lie, is it not???Quote:
Originally Posted by daybreaker2
Piss on Gray, huh? Of course, we hang on every word he has about hurricanes...but I guess he's an idiot and can't speak to the bullshit science...yes, bullshit science...proffered by AlGore and his army of minions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgbitten
Ha! Do you actually listen to his predictions? He has been realllly accurate in the past. Go read some past articles pre 2005 and see how accurate he was. The only bullshit being spewed is coming from "Dr." William Gray.
The people who claim Bush lied have made that very clear on this board...Quote:
Originally Posted by Rus-La
I hate that this issue became politicized. Any good science is clouded or distorted now. Science should be valued based on it's scientific merit, but now it's judged on what side it supports, who funded it, and what news agency reports it. Science, politics, and the Earth are all losing this battle.
The only person to come out against global warming that I respect is Raymond Kurzweil. But it didnt even sound like he denied its existence, just that he thinks in 20-40 years we'll have advanced enough to not be outputting so much crap, so why even worry about it?