Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers.

[mOgliE]

Isn't refreshing to share what one feels about the climate on a forum, without the fear of being targeted by the Global Warming Stasi?


You are all welcome.


 

What the fuck are you even talking about?

Like you re persecuted sure... you just say suit so it's normal that people treat you this way. But don't go like you re harrassed by people or anything. You ve  always been free to argue about everything! You re not some kind of resistant don't get too arrogant...

Quite the reverse.  We all ARE THE BANNED FROM REDDIT. 

We are those who punched back twice as hard and only grew stronger.

And don't complain - because your ideas are welcome too.

You're banned from reddit not because you defend climate denying.

You're all banned from reddit as you should be banned from here simply because you keep giving out totally shitty sources and present them as reliable scientific sources.

Try not to think lazy.  I can do all kinds of sources.  But then you are not in a position to take the moral high ground and from that high perch, with a booming voice proclaim to the heavens what is an acceptable source.  You are the guy that refused to look at actual sourced satellite temperature data, IIRC.

Wrong, I looked at it and saw the exact definition of the words "temperature increase"

When I linked to the actual original satellite data, you found some excuse to disregard it.

So what the fuck is your problem, dude?  You don't win a scientific argument with insults, or with denials.  Denying the satellite data...

Wait, are you a Denier?

I never insulted you. Simply put the fact that you get banned for giving out false arguments and lies (like the blog article you gave that willingly misinterpreted a scientific article).

[Spendulus]

Isn't refreshing to share what one feels about the climate on a forum, without the fear of being targeted by the Global Warming Stasi?


You are all welcome.


 

What the fuck are you even talking about?

Like you re persecuted sure... you just say suit so it's normal that people treat you this way. But don't go like you re harrassed by people or anything. You ve  always been free to argue about everything! You re not some kind of resistant don't get too arrogant...

Quite the reverse.  We all ARE THE BANNED FROM REDDIT. 

We are those who punched back twice as hard and only grew stronger.

And don't complain - because your ideas are welcome too.

You're banned from reddit not because you defend climate denying.

You're all banned from reddit as you should be banned from here simply because you keep giving out totally shitty sources and present them as reliable scientific sources.

Try not to think lazy.  I can do all kinds of sources.  But then you are not in a position to take the moral high ground and from that high perch, with a booming voice proclaim to the heavens what is an acceptable source.  You are the guy that refused to look at actual sourced satellite temperature data, IIRC.

Wrong, I looked at it and saw the exact definition of the words "temperature increase"

When I linked to the actual original satellite data, you found some excuse to disregard it.

So what the fuck is your problem, dude?  You don't win a scientific argument with insults, or with denials.  Denying the satellite data...

Wait, are you a Denier?

I never insulted you. Simply put the fact that you get banned for giving out false arguments and lies (like the blog article you gave that willingly misinterpreted a scientific article).

The parts to focus on I have bolded to help you.

[sdp]

I will get banned from reddit for this,  but I am a Flat Earth denier!

[Spendulus]

I will get banned from reddit for this,  but I am a Flat Earth denier!

But are you a Denier of the Warming of Flat?

[notbatman]

I will get banned from reddit for this,  but I am a Flat Earth denier!

Many people live in denial, you're not alone.

[dwma]

People involved in crypto-currencies are an interesting lot but they all have a huge bias against accepted reality. It is conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory. I'm not saying they're anymore 'wrong' than the average Joe, but their biases in this regard are far beyond the average Joe.

Finding a hive of climate science deniers on here should be of no surprise to anyone.

[SgtMoth]

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36130346


Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth'

[hdbuck]

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36130346


Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth'

no kidding, that's real science: photosynthesis.

[mOgliE]

Isn't refreshing to share what one feels about the climate on a forum, without the fear of being targeted by the Global Warming Stasi?


You are all welcome.


 

What the fuck are you even talking about?

Like you re persecuted sure... you just say suit so it's normal that people treat you this way. But don't go like you re harrassed by people or anything. You ve  always been free to argue about everything! You re not some kind of resistant don't get too arrogant...

Quite the reverse.  We all ARE THE BANNED FROM REDDIT. 

We are those who punched back twice as hard and only grew stronger.

And don't complain - because your ideas are welcome too.

You're banned from reddit not because you defend climate denying.

You're all banned from reddit as you should be banned from here simply because you keep giving out totally shitty sources and present them as reliable scientific sources.

Try not to think lazy.  I can do all kinds of sources.  But then you are not in a position to take the moral high ground and from that high perch, with a booming voice proclaim to the heavens what is an acceptable source.  You are the guy that refused to look at actual sourced satellite temperature data, IIRC.

Wrong, I looked at it and saw the exact definition of the words "temperature increase"

When I linked to the actual original satellite data, you found some excuse to disregard it.

So what the fuck is your problem, dude?  You don't win a scientific argument with insults, or with denials.  Denying the satellite data...

Wait, are you a Denier?

I never insulted you. Simply put the fact that you get banned for giving out false arguments and lies (like the blog article you gave that willingly misinterpreted a scientific article).

The parts to focus on I have bolded to help you.

Again, no insult and I looked at your data. Which showed what anyone on the world but the climate change denyers call a rise.

[mOgliE]

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36130346


Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth'

By one of the authors:
"But we can't be certain yet when that would happen. Hopefully, the world will follow the Paris agreement objectives and limit warming below 2C"

Though it's an excellent news if Nature is able to adapt itself faster than what we expected of course!

But don't you think it's a bit foolish to just throw a stone in the hope that it won't touch anything?

[mOgliE]

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36130346


Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth'

no kidding, that's real science: photosynthesis.

YOu're wrong and that's what's interesting. Photosynthesis has nothing to do with science, it's a complete natural phenomenon  in which humans can't interfere willingly.
The article is intereting because it shows Nature is able to adapt itself faster than what we thought. But there was nothing obvious in the fact that higher CO2 concentration helps trees. The perfect contrary phenomenon has already been demonstrated. This article might prove that greening outweights asphyxion of plants, but even them are not sure of it. And will it be enough to stock the CO2? Even the authors of the article are sckeptical about that.

[Spendulus]

Isn't refreshing to share what one feels about the climate on a forum, without the fear of being targeted by the Global Warming Stasi?


You are all welcome.


 

What the fuck are you even talking about?

Like you re persecuted sure... you just say suit so it's normal that people treat you this way. But don't go like you re harrassed by people or anything. You ve  always been free to argue about everything! You re not some kind of resistant don't get too arrogant...

Quite the reverse.  We all ARE THE BANNED FROM REDDIT.  

We are those who punched back twice as hard and only grew stronger.

And don't complain - because your ideas are welcome too.

You're banned from reddit not because you defend climate denying.

You're all banned from reddit as you should be banned from here simply because you keep giving out totally shitty sources and present them as reliable scientific sources.

Try not to think lazy.  I can do all kinds of sources.  But then you are not in a position to take the moral high ground and from that high perch, with a booming voice proclaim to the heavens what is an acceptable source.  You are the guy that refused to look at actual sourced satellite temperature data, IIRC.

Wrong, I looked at it and saw the exact definition of the words "temperature increase"

When I linked to the actual original satellite data, you found some excuse to disregard it.

So what the fuck is your problem, dude?  You don't win a scientific argument with insults, or with denials.  Denying the satellite data...

Wait, are you a Denier?

I never insulted you. Simply put the fact that you get banned for giving out false arguments and lies (like the blog article you gave that willingly misinterpreted a scientific article).

The parts to focus on I have bolded to help you.

Again, no insult and I looked at your data. Which showed what anyone on the world but the climate change denyers call a rise.

The actual satellite data sets show no statistically significant warming.  In lay terms, that means no trend.  Do you have any other exaggerations or mis representations of data to bring out to support your true faith and belief?

Because I've got news for you.  When a scientific controversy must be supported at all costs, and when that means it is necessary to use mis representation, denial, obfuscation, and ad hominem attacks to support it, as far as science is concerned, it's over for those hypotheses.  But don't worry — you are NOT ALONE.  There appear to be quite a few people that would believe a fantasy over facts.



http://www.steynonline.com/7517/steyn-vs-the-big-climate-enforcers

Prof Judith Curry, the former chair of Earth and atmospheric sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, added: "It is inappropriate to dismiss the arguments of the so-called contrarians, since their disagreement with the consensus reflects conflicts of values and a preference for the empirical (i.e. what has been observed) versus the hypothetical (i.e. what is projected from climate models).

[Schleicher]

The actual satellite data sets show no statistically significant warming.  In lay terms, that means no trend.

What's your definitition of "statistically significant" ?
Since the start of the satellite measurements the temperature has risen about 1 degree Celsius, 0.4 degree of you don't count the current El Nino.

[katrimans]

According to a study in the US, models for predicting the rate at which temperatures around the world would rise from 1998 onwards

[dwma]

The actual satellite data sets show no statistically significant warming.  In lay terms, that means no trend.

What's your definitition of "statistically significant" ?
Since the start of the satellite measurements the temperature has risen about 1 degree Celsius, 0.4 degree of you don't count the current El Nino.

You can tell Spendulus is a deluded schmuck.  Say something really basic, then follow up with 'in lay terms'.  The fact is, 'statistically significant' is a subjective term.

People who are smart enough and trained appropriately are able to see outside the biases of their little mammalian brains.  I know it is sexy to think you're the on the right side with your version of the truth, but delusions are just another inescapable part of man and his ego.

[mOgliE]

The actual satellite data sets show no statistically significant warming.  In lay terms, that means no trend.  Do you have any other exaggerations or mis representations of data to bring out to support your true faith and belief?

Because I've got news for you.  When a scientific controversy must be supported at all costs, and when that means it is necessary to use mis representation, denial, obfuscation, and ad hominem attacks to support it, as far as science is concerned, it's over for those hypotheses.  But don't worry — you are NOT ALONE.  There appear to be quite a few people that would believe a fantasy over facts.



http://www.steynonline.com/7517/steyn-vs-the-big-climate-enforcers

Prof Judith Curry, the former chair of Earth and atmospheric sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, added: "It is inappropriate to dismiss the arguments of the so-called contrarians, since their disagreement with the consensus reflects conflicts of values and a preference for the empirical (i.e. what has been observed) versus the hypothetical (i.e. what is projected from climate models).

Well why don't you simply hands us the figures proving there is no warming trend?
Because that's fucking easy to do no? You've got the raw data, it's a clear upper trend whatever you say. You want to deny it? Well then just check the data with regressi and plot the derivation of the temperature curve...

[samlanhan1]

Stephan Molyneux broke this down with hours of data .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82W41de4TT4&list=PLMNj_r5bccUwgm4-u98iH5X0EUD0w0L1j


I have to agree with him that our very nature is helping earth , especially since we've been finding ways to get rid of pollutants and release C02

[Wilikon]

People involved in crypto-currencies are an interesting lot but they all have a huge bias against accepted reality. It is conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory. I'm not saying they're anymore 'wrong' than the average Joe, but their biases in this regard are far beyond the average Joe.

Finding a hive of climate science deniers on here should be of no surprise to anyone.

Should people voicing a different opinion than yours be banned from the internet?

[tvbcof]

Well why don't you simply hands us the figures proving there is no warming trend?
Because that's fucking easy to do no? You've got the raw data, it's a clear upper trend whatever you say. You want to deny it? Well then just check the data with regressi and plot the derivation of the temperature curve...

Note to Warmunistas:  For maximum affect, just make sure you use the 'raw adjusted' data.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=374873.msg14064015#msg14064015

[tvbcof]

People involved in crypto-currencies are an interesting lot but they all have a huge bias against accepted reality. It is conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory. I'm not saying they're anymore 'wrong' than the average Joe, but their biases in this regard are far beyond the average Joe.

Finding a hive of climate science deniers on here should be of no surprise to anyone.

Yes, not terribly surprising.  Many of us here on the bitcointalk.org forum questioned and researched the highly propagandized 'understandings' of the fiat monetary systems and that is why we are here.  It is a proclivity which correlates to the questioning of other similarly propagandized 'understandings' implanted to achieve a designed effect among the plebs.  Usually associated with lining the pockets of a select few at the top.