As incredibly smart, wise and well informed as you are, a reasonable person would think you'd know more about it.
As incredibly smart, wise and well informed as you are, a reasonable person would think you'd know more about it.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
There's your primary problem, Petey.
I think for myself.
At the risk of being ironic, may I invite you to think for yourself?
Skimming moonbat forums for trolling ideas leaves you painted in a box every time you try it because you don't understand the subject matter and are just parroting what some other moonbat commented on with a copy/paste. What was the definition of insanity, again?
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
It's pretty arrogant to think I can be an expert in climate science, economics, mathematics, english, tax law, astrophysics, real estate, civil engineering, brain surgery, AI programming, psychology, etc etc etc. Wow you are impressive to have PhD depth in all areas of life. You don't have to rely on any external information because you know it all and can think your way through everything. Seriously incredible. Congrats! You must be a trillionare because you are a master in the stock market. btw, why did you not retire as a general in service? Didn't you know everything about military strategy and tactics? Don't tell me you had to learn anything from your superiors. Are you telling me they knew things you didn't?
Last edited by pete311; 11-06-2017 at 11:50 AM.
Sorry... but no, don't want to play your games.
Climate change is your new name for global warming, and if it wasn't, you'd all still be calling it global warming. You changed the name for a reason. The same reason you call illegal aliens, undocumented immigrants, and homos, gay, etc. It's what you people do.
But maybe you could explain why the Antarctica ice sheet hasn't declined in the last 100 years, and is in fact growing.
Well, yes, you are very arrogant, Petey. Unjustified, I'm afraid.
You don't have to be an expert and still arrive at the correct conclusion if you're willing to study the subject at hand objectively, something you've endlessly demonstrated that you're incapable of. You have your uninformed opinion and you'll twist & distort in a desperate attempt to justify it - and when we dive in for factual backup, you're lacking every single time. It's very funny.
This is a common shortcoming of moonbats, and why they get wrecked in debates all over the internet daily. They love to do just like you do as I described above in my last post, and it never works out if there is someone halfway intelligent observing the regurgitated nonsense. It certainly doesn't fly around here.
What is the definition of insanity, again?
Last edited by NightTrain; 11-06-2017 at 12:04 PM.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
So right off the bat this "study" indicates "loss of ice," but yet I asked you if you could explain how the ice pack in Antarctica has grown, and you can't answer that.
That's all. How does the Antarctic ice pack grow if the planet is warming?
Or is the "study" more fake science and lying about the numbers?