Global warming is real

[dantes]

You demonstrated no such absurdity. The solar system has evolved considerably and I wouldn’t deny the numerous near passes and collisions in the early solar system 4 billion years ago. You’re fabricating my positions by doing so.

You’re clearly the one who is dwelling on it.

[dantes]

The “incident” you’re describing was an example of taking something out of context to create a dishonest attack on the credibility of someone.

It’s too bad so many people fell for the fraud that was the “incident” and still believe that phrase indicated any sort of devious behavior by Mann.

[noSpaces]

These are interesting. Do you have similar links for Greenland?

[Samm]

@dantes

You demonstrated no such absurdity. The solar system has evolved considerably and I wouldn’t deny the numerous near passes and collisions in the early solar system 4 billion years ago. You’re fabricating my positions by doing so.

You’re clearly the one who is dwelling on it.

You admited that you were trolling me and yet you keep on the offensive. What do you want me to do, roll over? Is your ego that fragile?

[Samm]

@dantes

The “incident” you’re describing was an example of taking something out of context to create a dishonest attack on the credibility of someone.

It’s too bad so many people fell for the fraud that was the “incident” and still believe that phrase indicated any sort of devious behavior by Mann.

To put it in context for you, they set out to cover it up and got caught. Is that clear enough for you?

[Samson_Corwell]

@Richard_Nielsen

If there is a warming or cooling issue, it is an Engineering problem, not a science problem.

How would it be either?

@Richard_Nielsen

Professors write papers, Engineers actually work in the fields

This is very false. You can find some professors who study environmental scientists “out in the field”. Marine biologists can be professors and sometimes they will go out on expeditions in the ocean. Geologists go out and visit volcanoes.

[Samson_Corwell]

@Richard_Nielsen

Absolutely, our orbit has not ever been perfect, not to mention the one body in our system that effects us the most is ever changing and that is the sun, its gravitational pull on us is not constant. Many things effect our lose wobble around it.

The Sun’s gravitational pull does not vary except over billions of years.

What is a “perfect” orbit? A phrase you just made up?

[dantes]

Where did I say anything about trolling? Those are your words not mine.

[dantes]

It’s clear you believe the interpretation they want you to believe.

Unfortunately for you it’s incorrect.

[Samm]

@dantes

Where did I say anything about trolling? Those are your words not mine.

Yes … your word was “jab,” but your persistent jabbing over many posts makes it trolling.

[Samm]

@dantes

It’s clear you believe the interpretation they want you to believe.

Unfortunately for you it’s incorrect.

Their deceit is not unfortunate for me, it was unfortunate for them. They blew their credibility.

[dantes]

The initial comment was a jab. Subsequent comments are discussion about the cause for the initial comment.

That’s not trolling, not how it’s defined in this forum.

And I never admitted I was trolling you, that’s a false statement.

[dantes]

Not to people who understood the context of what they were saying. The people who took a passing glance without understanding the comment or what it was referring to would possibly reach your conclusion.

Which was the intended purpose of the dishonest people who pushed the false attack in the first place.

[Samm]

@dantes

The initial comment was a jab. Subsequent comments are discussion about the cause for the initial comment.

That’s not trolling, not how it’s defined in this forum.

And I never admitted I was trolling you, that’s a false statement.

Nope … when you persist on a tact that you know is false (because you admitted so,) it’s trolling. Read the TOS.

[Samm]

@dantes

Not to people who understood the context of what they were saying. The people who took a passing glance without understanding the comment or what it was referring to would possibly reach your conclusion.

Which was the intended purpose of the dishonest people who pushed the false attack in the first place.

What did the comment mean to you?

[dantes]

It’s a valid criticism of your posting. It’s trolling to point it out. Sorry if that upsets you but it’s not trolling. Next time keep your time frames consistent.

[Samm]

@dantes

It’s a valid criticism of your posting. It’s trolling to point it out. Sorry if that upsets you but it’s not trolling. Next time keep your time frames consistent.

It wasn’t criticism, it was a false narrative … one which you persisted in until you finally admited was done simply to jab me. That sir is trolling.

[dantes]

It is and was a perfectly valid criticism.

A false narrative is saying I admitted to trolling.

I pointed out that you shifted time frames to conveniently suit your argument which is not an honest debating tactic. Which is what you did.

[dantes]

It means there is a well known disconnect between tree ring data and temperature data after 1960 meaning we don’t use it as an accurate proxy after that time.

When you look at just tree rings, you’d think the global temp has declined, but we know that isn’t true.

Hide the decline means obscure the data that we know is incorrect.

What does it mean to you? Specifically that is.

[Samm]

@dantes

It is and was a perfectly valid criticism.

A false narrative is saying I admitted to trolling.

I pointed out that you shifted time frames to conveniently suit your argument which is not an honest debating tactic. Which is what you did.

I did NOT shift any time frames. I CLEARLY defined the use of each time frame as I stated it. Your inability to comprehend my posts does not justify your criticism. Your persistence in that criticism (jab) after having your misunderstanding explained, is trolling.

How long are you going to keep up this charade?