Ah, the Right Wing's Attack on Public Service Employees Flourishes Here in P&R

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Please continue, RWN ditto heads.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Please continue, RWN ditto heads.

They have proven to be anything but 'service' employees by keeping kids out of school and parents out of work for the past week. Dirt scum fits the better word for what they are doing. Trying to continue and rob the taxpayers blind.

[lostinblue 1,989]

We just get tired reading about all the global warming bs that is posted here.Just thought we should post about what is really damaging this country.

[luckytxn 2,265]

It seems to be OK if the Socialists get everything they want and to hell with the majority. Life is good.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We just get tired reading about all the global warming bs that is posted here.Just thought we should post about what is really damaging this country.

Do a search here on VJ as to who keeps posting threads trying to discredit the science of GW. No wait, you're not going to bother because you also are anti-science, anti-teachers, and anti-government.

[Zero Sum 305]

Well in all credit, the science of climate change/GW should be shared more often on this site. All too frequently the topics (just dis a quick search) pretty much ramble incessantly about government grants (without the gripers really using facts) for scientists, some kind of ethical conspiracy to keep that funding (again, by an entire global alliance of evil nerds- without the gripers knowing how that funding is limited mostly to US citizens and residents), then in the same mountain of logic: call it a Socialist conspiracy but only Socialist when it comes to taxing everyone except the businesses that stand to profit from this science. Weird people, really.

More time should be spent reviewing the actual science. I'd predict the more vocal fools wouldn't be so foolish, at least in this 'public' venue.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Well in all credit, the science of climate change/GW should be shared more often on this site.

Unfortunately, that's not what happens. Posting scientific facts seems to be the fastest way to end a thread on global warming here.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Unfortunately, that's not what happens. Posting scientific facts seems to be the fastest way to end a thread on global warming here.

I don't know. The know-nothing, knucklehead deniers would deny their own mothers in order to maintain their irrational refusal to accept the science of GW.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Unfortunately, that's not what happens. Posting scientific facts seems to be the fastest way to end a thread on global warming here.

That's because there are no scientific 'facts' on Global Warming (in the AGW sense), only theory after theory...

[Zero Sum 305]

Unfortunately, that's not what happens. Posting scientific facts seems to be the fastest way to end a thread on global warming here.

TKD: Thread Killing Disorder.

I imagine it happens when people see a downward trend in data where the data really shows an upward trend, with no ethical tricks involved other than those which blind some readers. Would I be correct in this assessment?

[Dakine10 5,452]

That's because there are no scientific 'facts' on Global Warming (in the AGW sense), only theory after theory...

Well there are a few facts and a lot of theories. Not believing theories or wanting to see more proof is a valid approach but most people are not arguing it that way.

Unfortunately the threads usually deteriorate into either "the scientists are lying" or "I have 8 inches of snow piled up in in my yard right now so there can't be GW" types of posts. Whether one believes GW is occuring or not, it's pointless to make the argument in a way that the average 7 year old would be embarrassed to make. It's very transparent to see when someone is arguing it from a political standpoint only.

[Dakine10 5,452]

TKD: Thread Killing Disorder.

I imagine it happens when people see a downward trend in data where the data really shows an upward trend, with no ethical tricks involved other than those which blind some readers. Would I be correct in this assessment?

Yes, but sometimes you have explain what a trend is first. It's hard to argue against a temperature graph.

[Zero Sum 305]

Yes, but sometimes you have explain what a trend is first. It's hard to argue against a temperature graph.

Its also really hard when people are too lazy to want to learn proper vocabulary or purposely miss the point. I always thought scientific vocabulary was supposed to be pretty exact in its definitions. Maybe I am in error. Or is it that stupidity is acceptable because its an 'alternate' perspective? Don't get me wrong, there's no problem with debate and evidence, but some people really have a difficult time arguing actual data and use single extreme cases (that may well be statistical outliers) that do not accurately represent the mean.

Logic tends to break down for many people that are too lazy or too dishonest to think that scientific data, by design is a result of a rigorously vetted process.

People that only want to make it political have that right, but they should be called out for what they are: politically motivated.