Yeah, sure, why not go forecasting. Though the crystal balls were nowhere near accurate this summer (at least in the NE), maybe they should call it “twocasting”.
I predict there will be climate change. In some aread of the US, there will be snow, sometimes, lots of it. I also predict that there will be a period of time when it will get colder than usual someplace in the south.
Some places that usually get snow, will get rain. Some that usually get rain, will get some snow.
Temperature-wise, there will be below freezing temperatures in most of the US in January and February. Florda will see mostly 60-80 degree temperatures.
The South American forecast…Chile today and hot tamale. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)
Nice pun there, IM (I’m being serious, I enjoyed it). Don’t forget to add these to your list:
Looking at global temperatures:
2010 was the warmest year since records began in 1880
2011 tied as the 11th warmest year since records began
2012 was the 10th warmest year since records began
2013 was tied as the 4th warmest year since records began
2014 was the warmest year since records began, beating 2010
It’s a safe bet that 2015 will be another year of record global warmth!
Please pay close attention to the third paragraph containing this statement-
“measurements are converted from direct temperature readings to temperature anomalies-values that represent the difference between the observed temperature and the long-term average temperature for each location and date. Across inaccessible areas that have few measurements, scientists use surrounding temperatures and other information to fill in the missing values”
In essence, they are not using the actual data collected. They are adjusting it based off other averages and they are filling in the blanks where they do not have or cannot obtain true readings.
I have a problem with “climate change scientists” being able to “insert” or “convert” information to determine an outcome. Call me cynical, but, how easy would it be to manipulate the data to prove a theory; get more grant money, push an agenda, etc.
Statistically, if they are determining averages from another serious of averages, the information is tainted.
Even if there calculations were true, the change in temperature is neglible. So much that I think it should be considered a statistical anomaly.
Over a 37 year period since 1976, the “average” temperature was warmer “on average” a whopping half of a degree per decade. On average, the temperature rose .05 of a degree each year.
From 1880 to 1936, the earth was getting cooler. The industrial revolution was already past and the countries of the world were primarily using coal. How do you explain that?
My explanation is that climate is naturally cyclical. The earth will eventually move into a phase where the temperatures will cool down again.
Also, for the person who disliked my comment, what part did you dislike? That fact that I applied logic to how the government is manipulating data to advance an agenda? Or do you dislike that you cannot provide a plausible rebuttal?
Sometimes, the truth hurts. Especially when you have been believing the lies that have been told to you.
Integrity, I liked your comment and analysis. As we have been saying all along, the so called climate scientists have been “cooking the books” for years to make their theories look legitimate. That is dishonest and it fits their agenda to a T.
Agent, you like it because it is bullshit, and confirms your beliefs, not because it is “analysis.” The methods they use are accurate.
But, you don’t believe mathematical modeling is possible, and have dismissed basic statistics over and over, showing not even an elementary understanding on the topic. Most stories here with a topic about rates is loaded with comments from you saying how the dorks, egg heads, and nerds behind their computers cannot accurately calculate rates, because your off the cuff analysis is more valuable to you than reality. You are a dolt on anything having to do with this stuff.
You hide behind fraudulent climate denialism like it is true science. It was recently revealed that Exxon scientists confirmed humans were responsible for climate change, and the company switched to a PR campaign to lie about it, spending a lot of money to convince dolts like you it was a conspiracy.
There is no topic I have seen you comment on where I would say you are anything other than totally incompetent, and totally unaware of a single piece of information based in reality.
September 18, 2015 at 3:12 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Hey integrity, how about we use a simple example of the differences in temperature from one location to another? If you take a temperature in the summer in a big city with large buildings and a lot of streets, it will be a lot hotter than out in the suburbs with trees, grass lawns. When I am playing golf, it is much hotter out in the fairway than sitting under a tree. Why do I get the picture of these dudes taking temperatures in the hottest location they can find? That is patently deceiving and dishonest to portray temperatures.
Agent, yes, the devil is in the details. We do not know where or when these temperatures are taken.
September 22, 2015 at 12:27 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Your explanation is wrong. Your comment shows a fundamental misunderstanding about even basic statistics. The methods you cite are time-tested, and have been proven time after time to be accurate. Of course, no data could convince you, because the data is in, and you are still clinging to a conspiracy theory.
The temperature change is not negligible over even a moderate period of time, and every climate scientist acknowledges this. Even the frauds claiming it is due to something else say it would be a big deal, but we will use technology to get through it.
You cite coal, but there were not hundreds of millions of cars on the road at all times, and the population was much smaller, with far fewer people using any electricity at all. You are comparing apples to oranges, and saying it equals a carrot, because that puts money in the scientists’ pockets. It is moronic.
UW – My explanation is not wrong, it is a logical opinion. FYI, I have more than basic understanding of statistics, which is why I can question their outcomes.
Anytime data is inserted without it being fact dilutes the outcome, regardless of how “scientific” the estimates are.
There are billions of places on earth where temperatures can be obtained. How many temperatures are being taken from around the world? The lower the number, the lower the credibility. Where are they being taken from? Again, if there are not an equal amount (longitude/latitude) the data has a greater chance to be skewed.
Are they taking the tempererature everyday, at the same time and place, at all the same locations? Why do they need to “fill in the blanks” in some areas if they all ready have enough data points?
You make some valid points regarding the population and number of cars on the road. However, it is very naive to think that money and greed might not be skewing the results or tipping the scales in favor of an agenda.
Scientists have been known to fraudulently alter results to continue to receive research money. Corporations have been known to lie or withhold information if it meant to increase profits. Thinking that doesn’t happen is moronic.
September 18, 2015 at 10:00 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
I totally agree with you that “statistically, if they are determining averages from another serious of averages, the information is tainted”, but I didn’t quite get that from their explanation.
They definitely say some data may not be actually observed/recorded, and instead surrounding data is used to fill in those blanks, but I missed the whole ‘average of an average’ as their technique here.
I read that third paragraph and you failed to include the last line in your post which said, “This process provides a consistent, reliable method for monitoring Earth’s surface temperature over time.”
Does it really? I guess that’s debatable – I am not a statistician and do not pretend to know the veracity of that statement, but they are at least being 100% honest about where the information is coming from and why it’s being calculated in that manner.
It’s not like NOAA is trying to hide how they reached their conclusions. I’m a cynic too, so I get where you’re coming from, and I totally appreciate you viewing things with a grain of salt and trying to get to the underlying truth using reasoned logic and any/all evidence available.
I’m not saying man is 100% responsible for this increase, nor am I willing to say man has contributed 0% to this change. I guess my cynical nature about the earth’s temperatures rising faster now than we have ever recorded before is tempered when over 98% of accredited scientists are in agreement about that “fact” (I put fact in quotes for you :)
Thanks for you fair and honest opinion, Rosenblatt.
Regarding the “average on averages” comment, they are converting (changing) the actual temperature to reflect a value that is the difference from the real temperature to the long term average. The value for each year in the graph appears to reflect an average value difference. If they are basing the change off of the average value difference, it would not be statistically incorrect. They would need to calculate the actual average temperature for each year before calculating the differnce. Maybe that is what they are actually doing.
I left the last line off because it is what I would expect them to say. I agree that it is debateable and relies upon them being consistent about being consistent. Too much human element for me to trust a generic statement.
I was glad to see that they were forthright in how they actually fill in the gaps.
Regarding man’s responsibility in this, we have a duty to be good stewards of all of our resources, period. That said, I strongly have my doubts that man is the cause or even partly the cause of the change in temperature. As previously said, I believe the earth’s climate is cyclical. The change, in my opinion, is so low that it is impossible to precisely determine the direct cause. Especially when they are filling in the gaps with “calculated” and not factual information. Temperatures can vary by as much as 10 degrees within small radius.
A couple of other questions come to mind about how they calculate the average temperature:
Why use estimated temperatures at all if they have enough “touch points” with actual data?
How many estimated temperatures are they using and where on the earth are these locations?
If they are in the desert, it would likely be hotter. Maybe if they added a few from the mountains, the average would come down.
For it to be the most accurate calculation, there would have to be the same amount of longitudinal and latitudinal locations. Any thing less would reduce the credibility.
oops…messed up again. meant to say “it would not be statistically correct”.
September 18, 2015 at 2:58 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Regarding the 98% of theaccredited scientists in agreement about the earth’s temperature rising, it is because they are reading the same tainted data that is being fed to them.
How many of the 98% are actually engaged in personally gathering the data? I don’t know but I amm pretty certain it is less than 100%.
One last thing to remember, there were at least 98% of the people (engineers, most likely) that swore that the Titanic could never be sunk. We all know how that turned out.
It’s almost the weekend, so I’ll try to be brief in my reply. As I’ve said before, I may not always agree with you IM, but I respect the h3ll out of how you express your views and support your arguments.
In order for me to come around and take the stance that the books are cooked, you hit the nail on the head with these two questions:
Why use estimated temperatures at all if they have enough “touch points” with actual data? and How many estimated temperatures are they using and where on the earth are these locations?
If they estimated 1% of the temp’s and took it from data points 2 miles on each side, no big deal. If they estimated 50% of the temp’s and took it from data 100’s of miles away, that would be totally different.
As for your good stewards comment, I’m with you entirely and that’s really what I think we (the global “we”, not specific to you and I) should be debating. “What can we do to ensure the habitability of the planet for future generations” is the crux of the matter in my opinion.
September 18, 2015 at 6:11 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Thanks Rosenblatt.
I sincerely appreciate your thoughtful comments, too.
I think we (conservatives) are tired of the govt intruding on our rights and them telling us what to do. They appear to make crap up to instill fear so that we fall in line. The low information people believe everything they hear and do not question or research or apply common sense to what is being said.
I sense that you try to make up your own mind based on the facts (or alleged facts) that you find. I only ask that you use caution about where you are getting your info. Unfortunately, there are alot of people with their own agendas, on both sides, that feed us the BS they want us to hear. I will continue to try to do the same (question where I get may facts or alleged facts).
Have a great weekend!
September 22, 2015 at 12:31 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Their info is not tainted. Looking over a wide swath of land, seeing it is 75 degrees in one place, 75 degrees 10 miles away, and the conditions are the same in between is a perfectly reasonable way to determine the temperature in the place in between.
You are not a statistician, but you still seem to be fine with questioning the methods that all the legit statisticians and scientists accept, because crank deniers say it is wrong. Their models have been confirmed over and over as accurate, and if anything too conservative. On the other hand, the deniers use cherry-picked start dates, throw out moronic theory after theory, and outright lie, and people act like they are equal in standing.
Have you ever lived in a place where it is raining in one area and snowing a mile away? I have. The temperatures can range as much as 10 degrees in a very small radius. THAT IS A FACT!
Many of the so-called legit scientists and statisticians have been caught fudging the numbers. THAT IS A FACT, TOO!
You can be a nice little sheep and believe everything MSNBC feeds you. It is your free choice. Scientists thought for years that the earth was the center of the universe and the sun revolved around the earth. I guess the deniers back then were moronic too.
How’s that missing link coming along? Did you find it yet?
The climate changes, naturally. It has since the beginning of time.
September 22, 2015 at 7:42 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Integrity matters, you are a fool. You show you don’t have the slightest clue about science with your backwards, stupid missing link comment. A “missing link” cannot exist, because of how evolution works. But, you fucking dolt, they have found example after example over the years that fill in the picture more and more, and fit between other fossils found. You don’t believe in science, nothing will ever convince you.
The temperature can vary on a day, but not over the long term. That is why they use a huge amount of data, and use averages. “Many” have been caught, yeah, no shit, just like everything else, but in this case thousands of examples of independent research has shown the same thing, including by the oil companies who hid it, and that’s not fudged data.
Also, there may be individual missing data points, which is accounted for in their methods, but even if a retard, like you, comes along and says this invalidates the whole thing, you have to see if that makes sense. Obviously to anybody with a brain, it doesn’t. Yes, maybe the few missing data points are all astronomically colder coincidentally, and the temperature hasn’t increased. Of course, that’s idiotic, but as they have put out more and more research stations, if your brutal assertion were true, this would have brought the temperature down; it hasn’t, it has confirmed the models and previous data.
Anybody who doesn’t believe in evolution is a scourge to society, the earth, and incompetent to discuss anything having to do with reality. Get a grip.
September 23, 2015 at 10:00 am
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
UW –
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction. Proverbs 1:7
Scientists are proving that the universe has an “order” to it and that it must have been created. If the universe was created, there must be a creator. You don’t believe in God, nothing will ever convince you, except perhaps God Himself.
Also, I never said that the earth wasn’t getting warmer. The climate changes because that is what it does. Even if it is getting warmer, the difference in temperature is so negligible that it is impossible to pinpoint the direct cause because there are too many variables. The randomness of the temperatures used in the small percentage of access points (by comparison to the entire earth) reduces the credibility. The scientists are theorizing the cause and effect.
Your problem is that you do not know the definition of theory.
Funny how you call me a scourge to society. We can tell by your mouth who is civil and who is not.
Finally, my grip is firmly clasped around Jesus Christ. He is the WAY, the TRUTH and the LIFE. There is NOTHING you can say or do to me to change this TRUTH. I pray that God softens your heart and opens your eyes to the truth. An eternity in hell is not something I wish for anyone.
I sincerely hope you have a great day.
September 24, 2015 at 11:40 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Scientists absolutely are not “proving” what you claim in the manner you claim. The only order like that are the immutable laws of physics. There may or may not be a God, but that is irrelevant to the discussion, aside from your excuse denying evolution, that all thinking people would immediately disregard.
You have claimed that the Earth may be warming, it is warming, but by a negligible amount, and that it is warming, but not man-made. The only things you are consistent on are that no matter what it’s not man-made, despite all legitimate scientists–including it was revealed recently, Exxon’s scientists–say, and being an idiot. Your position is solely a political one, having nothing to do with science, facts, reason, or even your religion (most religious leaders, including the Pope, accept the facts).
Even if you disagree it is man-made, you should be supporting all measures to fix it, because the consequences to the poor and the underdeveloped countries who played only a small part in creating the problem will be harmed so dramatically that it is extremely anti-Christian to ignore the problem. But, your true religion is American Far-Right Conservatism, not Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism, Judaism, or any other true religion.
September 17, 2015 at 4:21 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Hey integrity, Chile had an 8.3 on the Richter earthquake today. I am sure that will be man made Global Warming as well. By the way, there has been no “measurable” warming since 1978.
What Rosenblatt, do you not like quotation marks that are used to emphasize a statement? How about letting the cynic in you be used to wise up about Global Warming? It is nothing more than a hoax meant to influence people and it is wrong and dishonest.
Seriously man? Come on, Agent. Focus on what I said, not why you think I wrote it – I say exactly what I mean when I make a post.
I did not know what you were implying when you said “measurable” warming, so I quite simply and innocuously asked you to explain your intent.
Remember your own advice to me: You would be better off if you just answered the question</b
September 18, 2015 at 4:50 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
edit: You would be better off if you just answered the question
September 21, 2015 at 5:16 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Rosenblatt, you would be better off by not parsing every sentence that anyone makes on this blog. My statement was not to you, but Get your Facts straight on Progressive Socialists & Atheists. integrity already answered the “measurable” statement so I need not continue to try to explain that to you. I did that for emphasis, got it yet? Every time you have trotted out your measurements on Global Warming, it falls flat and integrity proved it to you about your falsified data.
September 22, 2015 at 8:31 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
I am sarcastically sorry I was giving you a chance to explain your post instead of taking someone else’s word about what they think you may have been trying to say.
September 18, 2015 at 3:35 pm
Get your facts straight... says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Here’s why I don’t put much stock in those who claim global warming/climate change is impending. We have only been recording temperature data since 1880. So that’s 135 years of recorded data. Now, if you believe in creationism and the earth was created at most 10,000 years ago, that’s only 0.0135 percent of the time recorded. If you believe a big bang that happened millions of years ago formed the earth, then that’s ratio is much, much smaller. Per Wikipedia, it states the earth is 4.5 billion years old. So that’s 0.000000003% of time recorded. Either time frame is not significant to declare global warming/climate change is occurring due to the direct actions of man.
Hey Get, didn’t you know that Progressive Socialists and Atheists were the smartest people on earth? If you don’t believe it, ask them and they will tell you that you are stupid for not believing their agenda. They have a leader who says the biggest threat to National Security is Climate Change. To them, there can’t be any evidence that changes in weather patterns over time is a natural cycle. It has to be man’s fault and we need to pay more taxes and spend money we don’t have to fix it. The earth will naturally correct itself, the sun will change things and there is not one thing man can do so we should save the $80 Trillion and use it in a better way.
Since you’ve called me a Progressive Socialist dozens of times and you know I’m an Atheist, I take your comment personally.
Re-read my replies to IM above. Did I ever say or imply he was stupid? Or that I was smarter than him? Did you read me agree with his concerns about how the data is collected?
Tone down the rhetoric? How many dozens of times have you told me I was stupid or your running mates like Ron, UW, Confused, Stan etc? I happen to agree with Integrity 100% so that makes me smart. You have been a Global Warming fanatic for years on this site and no one could make a dent in your beliefs. Perhaps Integrity has made some inroads into that now. I would hope you have seen the light at the end of the tunnel now. It has certainly taken long enough.
You said Prog/Soc-Atheists tell everyone who disagrees with their agenda that they’re stupid, and you’ve called me a Prog/Soc-Ath many many many times.
Just answer me this one simple question: Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me? Yes or no?
If yes – your Prog-Soc/Ath comment is true and I apologize.
If no – then you need to tone down the rhetoric. Capisce?
I would love to see Agent respond to these last few posts from Rosenblatt and integrity matters.
September 21, 2015 at 12:02 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
i really hope agent replies to the recent posts from rosenblatt and integrity matters
September 21, 2015 at 12:35 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
integrity, perhaps it is a new day between you and Rosenblatt. However, you have not been the object of derision like I have for the past 3-4 years, have not had your moniker hijacked to post ugly remarks and stirring up trouble like about 4-5 leftist posters have done to me. Every post they make to me is an insult or a word parsing exercise designed to attempt to discredit me. Sorry, I don’t speak their language and they don’t speak mine. That puts us all into conflict with every article. Good luck on your posts. I predict it won’t last long.
September 21, 2015 at 1:06 pm
integrity matters says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Agent –
Thanks for your reply. I can understand why you feel the way that you do. I know I have had my share of blowups, especially against Celtica and Libby.
At the end of the day, we can only control our own actions.
I will respectfully ask the others (Ron, Rosenblatt, Confused, Captain Planet, Bob, Dave and anyone else who tend to get “passionate” in their responses) to tone down the name calling, etc.
It has to start somewhere. Why not with us?
For those of us that proclaim to be Christians, we need to try to “turn the other cheek” and forgive as many times as it takes. I know it’s hard. We are going to mess up and blow up on them in the future, just like they will on us.
Let’s leave those times behind us and constantly strive to move forward. Holding a grudge is a choice and it only damages ones-self.
Everybody, thanks for considering and trying!
September 21, 2015 at 1:23 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Agent,
Sometimes you just make me laugh.
September 21, 2015 at 5:04 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
integrity, I have a good one for you on email I received today.
Hey Trust me, I haven’t ever figured out why Colorado State is in charge of predicting how many hurricanes are going to happen in a season and how many will hit land. They have an abysmal record for some time now. As you say, the so called experts cannot even predict weather in a few days let alone a month or two in the future.
Ron, way to go following integrity’s lead. I can’t tell you what I think about you because I would not be following integrity’s lead. Do you think that to be funny?
All I said is that you make me laugh sometimes. It was not meant to be an insult.
I have made enough attempts to extend an olive branch to you with no success. Are you honestly willing to accept and stop with insults such as: Liberal, Democrat, Socialist, Progressive, Moderate, low information voter, and Obama defender? (I find those all to be insults since none are true, regardless of what you or anyone else may believe. I am an Independent, period.)
That is a simple yes or no question and includes all of those inaccurate labels. All or nothing. What do you say?
Ron, it was an insult to me when you said I make you laugh. Tell me how that olive branch thing works when you continue to insult me on every post. Do you want me to turn the other cheek and just take it without response? Do you want me to agree with everything you post as if it is gospel? You have enough history on this blog to be shown as a true liberal even though you say you are an Independent. You have choked on those words enough, haven’t you? Anyone who says they are for Social Entitlements and Single Payer Health Insurance is truly a Progressive Socialist no matter how you try to paint yourself. Bob has pointed that out to you on a number of occasions and it went in one ear and out the other. There is not one Conservative bone in your body and you may as well admit it. Be honest for a change. I will not abandon my Conservative beliefs because I know the difference between right and wrong.
So, you’re response to a yes/no question is “Ron, it was an insult to me when you said I make you laugh. Tell me how that olive branch thing works when you continue to insult me on every post. Do you want me to turn the other cheek and just take it without response? Do you want me to agree with everything you post as if it is gospel? You have enough history on this blog to be shown as a true liberal even though you say you are an Independent. You have choked on those words enough, haven’t you? Anyone who says they are for Social Entitlements and Single Payer Health Insurance is truly a Progressive Socialist no matter how you try to paint yourself. Bob has pointed that out to you on a number of occasions and it went in one ear and out the other. There is not one Conservative bone in your body and you may as well admit it. Be honest for a change. I will not abandon my Conservative beliefs because I know the difference between right and wrong.”
And you call Rosenblatt a word parser.
September 22, 2015 at 10:10 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Ron, so your response to my reply is to copy my post word for word because you have no original thoughts in your head and then throw in an insult to boot. Perhaps you need psychotherapy for your affliction. When you were in school, did you copy off of another students test answers? I have noticed it is pretty common for liberal posters to repeat what someone else posts before they insult. Do you just say to yourself – Hmm, don’t know what to say so I will just copy everything down and then insult him. That should work. NOT!
September 22, 2015 at 10:22 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Agent – care to comment on my compromise offer regarding me calling out the moniker thieves in consideration for you answering my question? I would like to see if we can reach a mutually amicable solution to our concerns and put those issues to rest once and for all.
September 22, 2015 at 11:07 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Agent,
You just have no clue, do you?
I was making a point that your response was supposed to be either, “Yes” or “No”, not some irrelevant rant trying to detract from my offer.
Let’s try this again, do you want to stop insulting each other or not? I have no problem with either approach.
Please post with either “yes”or “no”.
September 21, 2015 at 1:42 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
There’s a difference between a discussion, a debate and an argument. If you go into every post thinking “we’re all in conflict” we can never discuss or debate anything, no matter how hard I try.
Example 1: I asked you to elaborate why you put measurable in quotes. You insulted me instead of answering. I again explained I was merely seeking clarification of what you were trying to say, yet you ignored the question.
Example 2: You said all Prog-Soc/Ath say they’re smarter than people who don’t agree with them, and “we” will tell you so if you don’t agree with our agenda. Clearly I did not do this to Integrity Matters, yet you ignore me when I asked you to confirm I did not use this tactic.
How can we have a discussion about anything if you go into every post on the defensive thinking I’m just looking for an argument, even when I literally tell you that’s not my intent?
So, I ask you again Agent — Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me? If yes – your Prog-Soc/Ath comment was accurate and I apologize for getting off on this tangent. If no – that’s good enough for me and I’ll move on presuming there’s nothing else in your reply that warrants a response.
Rosenblatt, one of your worst qualities is being a word parser and seeking an argument to anything I post on any subject at any time on any article. You don’t accept anything I say and I don’t accept anything you say so let’s just leave it at that.
As I recall, you never did call out the serial trolls directly and merely said you agreed with Ron after he had the courage to do it. That is a fact you cannot ignore. Had you been a man and stepped up to the plate, that might have repaired some of the damage from years of rancorous insulting behavior.
Instead of answering my simple, on-topic, relevant and completely reasonable question, you insult me again!?. Come on.
When I ask IM a question, I get an answer and am asked a follow-up question, which I answer, and so on. He does not insult me and ignore the question, which is why he and I can have civil conversations.
You are driving the negativity here. You negatively call me a word parser yet hypocritically parse my line of “if I find out who posted under your name, I will call out those individuals by name and tell them to stop being so immature” and try to argue that I never stepped up and called them out. Come on.
Let’s try this again. If you say “yes”, then I will apologize to you for harping on this topic even though I think you are 100% wrong. If you say “no”, then I will leave the topic on the floor and not bring it up again. You can easily end this by simply answering yes or no.
Here goes…
Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me, about climate change, how temp’s are measured, et cetera, in our above discourse?
Let’s try this again Rosenblatt for about the 12th time. When have you called out the others on this blog for moniker theft and insulting behavior to me? All you ever said was that you “would do it” if we found out who it was. I may be waiting until December or after before you do it, if ever. I am the one being wronged here, not you. If you want to get along with me, you will have to stop parsing every post with your own slant and you are going to have to call out the ones who regularly steal my moniker to post their hate and insults. All I want is a statement from you to tell those dudes to knock it off. Is that too much to ask? Apparently so in your case.
Ron, I can’t help it if you don’t like my posts. You said I have lied or misspoke multiple times. I am about a thousand behind you buddy. With every post, you dig a deeper hole for yourself. You probably can’t help it if you are from NY, grew up in one of the most liberal states in the union. It is in your genes and no one can tell you any different on any subject. Aren’t you tired yet of the Obama economy, NY running off 500,000 citizens due to the oppressive taxation, regulation? How about you and Planet wanting all fast food restaurants to go away? Over 3 million employed in that industry and you are ready to throw them under the bus. How is that going to make the economy grow?
September 21, 2015 at 4:58 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
When have I called them out? I just did in my last post, I did months ago, I also agreed with what Ron wrote about the topic, but apparently none of that is good enough for you.
Doesn’t a blanket statement of “It is wrong – it is immature – it needs to stop – if I find out who did it, I will call them out by name and say this again” suffice? I can’t call them out by name since there’s no proof who is the guilty party/parties.
Okay – here’s a compromise for you. Please write the exact words you want me to post that will appease you on this moniker theft situation. Do not include names of people you think are doing it since it can’t be proven who is really to blame. Just tell me verbatim what you want me to write so you’ll finally put this to rest and I’ll write it to put this matter behind us.
However, this is a compromise. Tit-for-tat.
I will write exactly what you want me to say this one time under one simple condition which is that you answer my reasonable and on-topic question with a simple yes or no. If you do not give me a straight answer to this question, do not expect me to appease your request to call out the others any more than I already have.
Here goes…
Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me, about climate change, how temp’s are measured, et cetera, in our above discourse?
September 22, 2015 at 9:08 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Agent,
You said, “I am about a thousand behind you buddy.”
Provide 3 specific examples where I was wrong, lied and/or misspoke, and did not admit to it when evidence was provided.
Good luck
September 21, 2015 at 3:44 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Agent,
You are the most blatant deflector. We have PROVEN that you have either lied, misspoke or have been wrong multiple times, yet you never admit your error(s). However, you will find fault in someone else or goon some irrelevant rant. If you need examples, please ask.
Louie, I am not familiar with Medved. Is he on XM radio and if so, what station? I have a feeling he is probably not wrong much if he is dealing with leftists on his program. They really don’t have a whole lot to offer except their agenda on entitlements.
Rosenblatt, I will say one thing, you are gifted at dodging and parsing words. It only took about six posts to get Ron to call out the moniker thieves and tell them to knock it off and you are still dodging after a dozen times. Ok, if you want me to acknowledge that you said you weren’t smarter than integrity, you didn’t say you were. I have grown tired of your posts on every Global Warming or Climate Change article posted when you post your fake statistics and stick to them no matter what. You have acted superior to about every Conservative on this blog. If you want to apologize for that, feel free. Following is what you need to say on the moniker thieve issue.
Attention All Moniker Thieves:
All of you need to stop with stealing Agents moniker to post nasty liberal drivel to stir up trouble between Agent and the other posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
All of you need to stop with stealing Agents moniker to post nasty liberal drivel to stir up trouble between Agent and the other posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Similarly,
All of you need to stop with stealing anyone’smoniker to post nasty liberal or conservativedrivel to stir up trouble between posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Random thought time. I listen to Michael Medved on my way home pretty much every night. He’s a conservative talk show host, but not like Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, or Levin. He specifically prioritizes callers who disagree with him, not so he can shout them down but so he can reasonably argue with them. He is willing to admit when he’s wrong and even apologize if someone has misinterpreted something he has said. I don’t agree with 100% of what he says, but I respect his opinion and the way he goes about it.
His mantra? “I. AM. NOT. A. VICTIM.” Even when the cards are against him, he doesn’t blame others but instead accepts personal responsibility and attempts to help others by bettering himself first.
Thanks, Louie. I’ll have to check him out. We definitely need more people like that in our political system. After all, didn’t George Washington purposely put people in his cabinet that disagreed with him to accomplish something similar?
Reasonable discourse and personal responsibility seem to be missing from what I’ve seen and heard across various mediums. I’m glad there’s someone out there bucking the trend.
Agent – if you decide not to take me up on my compromise outlined on September 21, 2015 at 4:58 PM, you can never again bring up your belief that I did not call people out for posting under your name.
In addition, I will take your inaction as a sign of bad-faith that you have no genuine interest in putting past issues behind us, even when I am willing to capitulate to your demand, going so far as to give you the opportunity to literally tell me exactly what I should write that will appease you.
I am doing my best to try and continue having a rational adult discourse with you, but I am not seeing anything close from you yet. Once again, I now wait for your response.
All of you need to stop with stealing Agents moniker to post nasty liberal drivel to stir up trouble between Agent and the other posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Similarly,
All of you need to stop with stealing anyone’smoniker to post nasty liberal or conservative drivel to stir up trouble between posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Good one Rosenblatt. Only 13 tries to make it happen. By the way, if you want me to have a discussion with you, try not to parse words or repeat a whole post I made before replying. I can’t get Ron to stop doing that and it is completely unnecessary. We can agree to disagree as we do on just about everything, but the word parsing is a no no. Surely, we both live in the USA and the language cannot be that different.
I do what you want and you STILL IMMEDIATELY dig on me in your first sentence. You just can’t let sleeping dogs lie, can you?
Unless I have to pull you back to something you said that we were talking about which you are ignoring, I won’t copy your whole post in my reply.
I’ll do you that favor for you if you do me one favor – stop saying ‘word parsing’ with a negative connotation.
Word parsing simply means I’m analyzing what you posted to discover the meaning of what you wrote. It’s how proper reading comprehension is achieved.
Give that phrase a rest (bonus points if you can tone down your rhetoric and stop telling me I don’t know right from wrong) and I’m sure we can have civil conversations going forward.
Rosenblatt, the English language is interesting. Words mean different things to different people. Apparently, depending on what part of the country you live in, they mean something different. Word parsing is how you object to anything I say on any subject. You look at my post and think, how can I parse his statement to the opposite viewpoint. It is your nature and it is annoying how you twist my words and then you become an ASK HOLE and keep on asking the same tired questions over and over and never get it.
September 25, 2015 at 4:40 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“then you become an ASK HOLE”
I think personal attacks are unprofessional and have no place on this site
Yeah, sure, why not go forecasting. Though the crystal balls were nowhere near accurate this summer (at least in the NE), maybe they should call it “twocasting”.
I’m sure they’ll be as accurate about this as they have been about the hurricane season so far.
Yes Dave, if you are lucky, Lake Michigan will freeze over again this winter.
I predict there will be climate change. In some aread of the US, there will be snow, sometimes, lots of it. I also predict that there will be a period of time when it will get colder than usual someplace in the south.
Some places that usually get snow, will get rain. Some that usually get rain, will get some snow.
Temperature-wise, there will be below freezing temperatures in most of the US in January and February. Florda will see mostly 60-80 degree temperatures.
The South American forecast…Chile today and hot tamale. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)
Nice pun there, IM (I’m being serious, I enjoyed it). Don’t forget to add these to your list:
Looking at global temperatures:
2010 was the warmest year since records began in 1880
2011 tied as the 11th warmest year since records began
2012 was the 10th warmest year since records began
2013 was tied as the 4th warmest year since records began
2014 was the warmest year since records began, beating 2010
It’s a safe bet that 2015 will be another year of record global warmth!
Thanks, Rosenblatt!
Let’s discuss how global temperatures are calculated.
Here is a link to the NOAA site explaining how global temperatures are measured. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature
Please pay close attention to the third paragraph containing this statement-
“measurements are converted from direct temperature readings to temperature anomalies-values that represent the difference between the observed temperature and the long-term average temperature for each location and date. Across inaccessible areas that have few measurements, scientists use surrounding temperatures and other information to fill in the missing values”
In essence, they are not using the actual data collected. They are adjusting it based off other averages and they are filling in the blanks where they do not have or cannot obtain true readings.
I have a problem with “climate change scientists” being able to “insert” or “convert” information to determine an outcome. Call me cynical, but, how easy would it be to manipulate the data to prove a theory; get more grant money, push an agenda, etc.
Statistically, if they are determining averages from another serious of averages, the information is tainted.
Even if there calculations were true, the change in temperature is neglible. So much that I think it should be considered a statistical anomaly.
Over a 37 year period since 1976, the “average” temperature was warmer “on average” a whopping half of a degree per decade. On average, the temperature rose .05 of a degree each year.
From 1880 to 1936, the earth was getting cooler. The industrial revolution was already past and the countries of the world were primarily using coal. How do you explain that?
My explanation is that climate is naturally cyclical. The earth will eventually move into a phase where the temperatures will cool down again.
oops…meant to say “series of averages”.
Also, for the person who disliked my comment, what part did you dislike? That fact that I applied logic to how the government is manipulating data to advance an agenda? Or do you dislike that you cannot provide a plausible rebuttal?
Sometimes, the truth hurts. Especially when you have been believing the lies that have been told to you.
That absolutely doesn’t mean what you think it means.
Thanks Comrade.
Please, enlighten us. What does it mean?
Integrity, I liked your comment and analysis. As we have been saying all along, the so called climate scientists have been “cooking the books” for years to make their theories look legitimate. That is dishonest and it fits their agenda to a T.
Agent, you like it because it is bullshit, and confirms your beliefs, not because it is “analysis.” The methods they use are accurate.
But, you don’t believe mathematical modeling is possible, and have dismissed basic statistics over and over, showing not even an elementary understanding on the topic. Most stories here with a topic about rates is loaded with comments from you saying how the dorks, egg heads, and nerds behind their computers cannot accurately calculate rates, because your off the cuff analysis is more valuable to you than reality. You are a dolt on anything having to do with this stuff.
You hide behind fraudulent climate denialism like it is true science. It was recently revealed that Exxon scientists confirmed humans were responsible for climate change, and the company switched to a PR campaign to lie about it, spending a lot of money to convince dolts like you it was a conspiracy.
There is no topic I have seen you comment on where I would say you are anything other than totally incompetent, and totally unaware of a single piece of information based in reality.
Hey integrity, how about we use a simple example of the differences in temperature from one location to another? If you take a temperature in the summer in a big city with large buildings and a lot of streets, it will be a lot hotter than out in the suburbs with trees, grass lawns. When I am playing golf, it is much hotter out in the fairway than sitting under a tree. Why do I get the picture of these dudes taking temperatures in the hottest location they can find? That is patently deceiving and dishonest to portray temperatures.
Agent, yes, the devil is in the details. We do not know where or when these temperatures are taken.
Your explanation is wrong. Your comment shows a fundamental misunderstanding about even basic statistics. The methods you cite are time-tested, and have been proven time after time to be accurate. Of course, no data could convince you, because the data is in, and you are still clinging to a conspiracy theory.
The temperature change is not negligible over even a moderate period of time, and every climate scientist acknowledges this. Even the frauds claiming it is due to something else say it would be a big deal, but we will use technology to get through it.
You cite coal, but there were not hundreds of millions of cars on the road at all times, and the population was much smaller, with far fewer people using any electricity at all. You are comparing apples to oranges, and saying it equals a carrot, because that puts money in the scientists’ pockets. It is moronic.
UW – My explanation is not wrong, it is a logical opinion. FYI, I have more than basic understanding of statistics, which is why I can question their outcomes.
Anytime data is inserted without it being fact dilutes the outcome, regardless of how “scientific” the estimates are.
There are billions of places on earth where temperatures can be obtained. How many temperatures are being taken from around the world? The lower the number, the lower the credibility. Where are they being taken from? Again, if there are not an equal amount (longitude/latitude) the data has a greater chance to be skewed.
Are they taking the tempererature everyday, at the same time and place, at all the same locations? Why do they need to “fill in the blanks” in some areas if they all ready have enough data points?
You make some valid points regarding the population and number of cars on the road. However, it is very naive to think that money and greed might not be skewing the results or tipping the scales in favor of an agenda.
Scientists have been known to fraudulently alter results to continue to receive research money. Corporations have been known to lie or withhold information if it meant to increase profits. Thinking that doesn’t happen is moronic.
I totally agree with you that “statistically, if they are determining averages from another serious of averages, the information is tainted”, but I didn’t quite get that from their explanation.
They definitely say some data may not be actually observed/recorded, and instead surrounding data is used to fill in those blanks, but I missed the whole ‘average of an average’ as their technique here.
I read that third paragraph and you failed to include the last line in your post which said, “This process provides a consistent, reliable method for monitoring Earth’s surface temperature over time.”
Does it really? I guess that’s debatable – I am not a statistician and do not pretend to know the veracity of that statement, but they are at least being 100% honest about where the information is coming from and why it’s being calculated in that manner.
It’s not like NOAA is trying to hide how they reached their conclusions. I’m a cynic too, so I get where you’re coming from, and I totally appreciate you viewing things with a grain of salt and trying to get to the underlying truth using reasoned logic and any/all evidence available.
I’m not saying man is 100% responsible for this increase, nor am I willing to say man has contributed 0% to this change. I guess my cynical nature about the earth’s temperatures rising faster now than we have ever recorded before is tempered when over 98% of accredited scientists are in agreement about that “fact” (I put fact in quotes for you :)
Thanks for you fair and honest opinion, Rosenblatt.
Regarding the “average on averages” comment, they are converting (changing) the actual temperature to reflect a value that is the difference from the real temperature to the long term average. The value for each year in the graph appears to reflect an average value difference. If they are basing the change off of the average value difference, it would not be statistically incorrect. They would need to calculate the actual average temperature for each year before calculating the differnce. Maybe that is what they are actually doing.
I left the last line off because it is what I would expect them to say. I agree that it is debateable and relies upon them being consistent about being consistent. Too much human element for me to trust a generic statement.
I was glad to see that they were forthright in how they actually fill in the gaps.
Regarding man’s responsibility in this, we have a duty to be good stewards of all of our resources, period. That said, I strongly have my doubts that man is the cause or even partly the cause of the change in temperature. As previously said, I believe the earth’s climate is cyclical. The change, in my opinion, is so low that it is impossible to precisely determine the direct cause. Especially when they are filling in the gaps with “calculated” and not factual information. Temperatures can vary by as much as 10 degrees within small radius.
A couple of other questions come to mind about how they calculate the average temperature:
Why use estimated temperatures at all if they have enough “touch points” with actual data?
How many estimated temperatures are they using and where on the earth are these locations?
If they are in the desert, it would likely be hotter. Maybe if they added a few from the mountains, the average would come down.
For it to be the most accurate calculation, there would have to be the same amount of longitudinal and latitudinal locations. Any thing less would reduce the credibility.
oops…messed up again. meant to say “it would not be statistically correct”.
Regarding the 98% of theaccredited scientists in agreement about the earth’s temperature rising, it is because they are reading the same tainted data that is being fed to them.
How many of the 98% are actually engaged in personally gathering the data? I don’t know but I amm pretty certain it is less than 100%.
One last thing to remember, there were at least 98% of the people (engineers, most likely) that swore that the Titanic could never be sunk. We all know how that turned out.
It’s almost the weekend, so I’ll try to be brief in my reply. As I’ve said before, I may not always agree with you IM, but I respect the h3ll out of how you express your views and support your arguments.
In order for me to come around and take the stance that the books are cooked, you hit the nail on the head with these two questions:
Why use estimated temperatures at all if they have enough “touch points” with actual data? and How many estimated temperatures are they using and where on the earth are these locations?
If they estimated 1% of the temp’s and took it from data points 2 miles on each side, no big deal. If they estimated 50% of the temp’s and took it from data 100’s of miles away, that would be totally different.
As for your good stewards comment, I’m with you entirely and that’s really what I think we (the global “we”, not specific to you and I) should be debating. “What can we do to ensure the habitability of the planet for future generations” is the crux of the matter in my opinion.
Thanks Rosenblatt.
I sincerely appreciate your thoughtful comments, too.
I think we (conservatives) are tired of the govt intruding on our rights and them telling us what to do. They appear to make crap up to instill fear so that we fall in line. The low information people believe everything they hear and do not question or research or apply common sense to what is being said.
I sense that you try to make up your own mind based on the facts (or alleged facts) that you find. I only ask that you use caution about where you are getting your info. Unfortunately, there are alot of people with their own agendas, on both sides, that feed us the BS they want us to hear. I will continue to try to do the same (question where I get may facts or alleged facts).
Have a great weekend!
Their info is not tainted. Looking over a wide swath of land, seeing it is 75 degrees in one place, 75 degrees 10 miles away, and the conditions are the same in between is a perfectly reasonable way to determine the temperature in the place in between.
You are not a statistician, but you still seem to be fine with questioning the methods that all the legit statisticians and scientists accept, because crank deniers say it is wrong. Their models have been confirmed over and over as accurate, and if anything too conservative. On the other hand, the deniers use cherry-picked start dates, throw out moronic theory after theory, and outright lie, and people act like they are equal in standing.
UW
Have you ever lived in a place where it is raining in one area and snowing a mile away? I have. The temperatures can range as much as 10 degrees in a very small radius. THAT IS A FACT!
Many of the so-called legit scientists and statisticians have been caught fudging the numbers. THAT IS A FACT, TOO!
You can be a nice little sheep and believe everything MSNBC feeds you. It is your free choice. Scientists thought for years that the earth was the center of the universe and the sun revolved around the earth. I guess the deniers back then were moronic too.
How’s that missing link coming along? Did you find it yet?
The climate changes, naturally. It has since the beginning of time.
Integrity matters, you are a fool. You show you don’t have the slightest clue about science with your backwards, stupid missing link comment. A “missing link” cannot exist, because of how evolution works. But, you fucking dolt, they have found example after example over the years that fill in the picture more and more, and fit between other fossils found. You don’t believe in science, nothing will ever convince you.
The temperature can vary on a day, but not over the long term. That is why they use a huge amount of data, and use averages. “Many” have been caught, yeah, no shit, just like everything else, but in this case thousands of examples of independent research has shown the same thing, including by the oil companies who hid it, and that’s not fudged data.
Also, there may be individual missing data points, which is accounted for in their methods, but even if a retard, like you, comes along and says this invalidates the whole thing, you have to see if that makes sense. Obviously to anybody with a brain, it doesn’t. Yes, maybe the few missing data points are all astronomically colder coincidentally, and the temperature hasn’t increased. Of course, that’s idiotic, but as they have put out more and more research stations, if your brutal assertion were true, this would have brought the temperature down; it hasn’t, it has confirmed the models and previous data.
Anybody who doesn’t believe in evolution is a scourge to society, the earth, and incompetent to discuss anything having to do with reality. Get a grip.
UW –
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction. Proverbs 1:7
Scientists are proving that the universe has an “order” to it and that it must have been created. If the universe was created, there must be a creator. You don’t believe in God, nothing will ever convince you, except perhaps God Himself.
Also, I never said that the earth wasn’t getting warmer. The climate changes because that is what it does. Even if it is getting warmer, the difference in temperature is so negligible that it is impossible to pinpoint the direct cause because there are too many variables. The randomness of the temperatures used in the small percentage of access points (by comparison to the entire earth) reduces the credibility. The scientists are theorizing the cause and effect.
Your problem is that you do not know the definition of theory.
Funny how you call me a scourge to society. We can tell by your mouth who is civil and who is not.
Finally, my grip is firmly clasped around Jesus Christ. He is the WAY, the TRUTH and the LIFE. There is NOTHING you can say or do to me to change this TRUTH. I pray that God softens your heart and opens your eyes to the truth. An eternity in hell is not something I wish for anyone.
I sincerely hope you have a great day.
Scientists absolutely are not “proving” what you claim in the manner you claim. The only order like that are the immutable laws of physics. There may or may not be a God, but that is irrelevant to the discussion, aside from your excuse denying evolution, that all thinking people would immediately disregard.
You have claimed that the Earth may be warming, it is warming, but by a negligible amount, and that it is warming, but not man-made. The only things you are consistent on are that no matter what it’s not man-made, despite all legitimate scientists–including it was revealed recently, Exxon’s scientists–say, and being an idiot. Your position is solely a political one, having nothing to do with science, facts, reason, or even your religion (most religious leaders, including the Pope, accept the facts).
Even if you disagree it is man-made, you should be supporting all measures to fix it, because the consequences to the poor and the underdeveloped countries who played only a small part in creating the problem will be harmed so dramatically that it is extremely anti-Christian to ignore the problem. But, your true religion is American Far-Right Conservatism, not Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism, Judaism, or any other true religion.
Hey integrity, Chile had an 8.3 on the Richter earthquake today. I am sure that will be man made Global Warming as well. By the way, there has been no “measurable” warming since 1978.
Can you please explain why you put measurable in quotes and what that is supposed to mean?
I’m guessing because the change was fractional, at best. See my post above on how the “averages” are calculated.
What Rosenblatt, do you not like quotation marks that are used to emphasize a statement? How about letting the cynic in you be used to wise up about Global Warming? It is nothing more than a hoax meant to influence people and it is wrong and dishonest.
Seriously man? Come on, Agent. Focus on what I said, not why you think I wrote it – I say exactly what I mean when I make a post.
I did not know what you were implying when you said “measurable” warming, so I quite simply and innocuously asked you to explain your intent.
Remember your own advice to me: You would be better off if you just answered the question</b
edit: You would be better off if you just answered the question
Rosenblatt, you would be better off by not parsing every sentence that anyone makes on this blog. My statement was not to you, but Get your Facts straight on Progressive Socialists & Atheists. integrity already answered the “measurable” statement so I need not continue to try to explain that to you. I did that for emphasis, got it yet? Every time you have trotted out your measurements on Global Warming, it falls flat and integrity proved it to you about your falsified data.
I am sarcastically sorry I was giving you a chance to explain your post instead of taking someone else’s word about what they think you may have been trying to say.
Here’s why I don’t put much stock in those who claim global warming/climate change is impending. We have only been recording temperature data since 1880. So that’s 135 years of recorded data. Now, if you believe in creationism and the earth was created at most 10,000 years ago, that’s only 0.0135 percent of the time recorded. If you believe a big bang that happened millions of years ago formed the earth, then that’s ratio is much, much smaller. Per Wikipedia, it states the earth is 4.5 billion years old. So that’s 0.000000003% of time recorded. Either time frame is not significant to declare global warming/climate change is occurring due to the direct actions of man.
Great points, Gyfs!
Hey Get, didn’t you know that Progressive Socialists and Atheists were the smartest people on earth? If you don’t believe it, ask them and they will tell you that you are stupid for not believing their agenda. They have a leader who says the biggest threat to National Security is Climate Change. To them, there can’t be any evidence that changes in weather patterns over time is a natural cycle. It has to be man’s fault and we need to pay more taxes and spend money we don’t have to fix it. The earth will naturally correct itself, the sun will change things and there is not one thing man can do so we should save the $80 Trillion and use it in a better way.
Since you’ve called me a Progressive Socialist dozens of times and you know I’m an Atheist, I take your comment personally.
Re-read my replies to IM above. Did I ever say or imply he was stupid? Or that I was smarter than him? Did you read me agree with his concerns about how the data is collected?
Tone down the rhetoric.
Tone down the rhetoric? How many dozens of times have you told me I was stupid or your running mates like Ron, UW, Confused, Stan etc? I happen to agree with Integrity 100% so that makes me smart. You have been a Global Warming fanatic for years on this site and no one could make a dent in your beliefs. Perhaps Integrity has made some inroads into that now. I would hope you have seen the light at the end of the tunnel now. It has certainly taken long enough.
You said Prog/Soc-Atheists tell everyone who disagrees with their agenda that they’re stupid, and you’ve called me a Prog/Soc-Ath many many many times.
Just answer me this one simple question: Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me? Yes or no?
If yes – your Prog-Soc/Ath comment is true and I apologize.
If no – then you need to tone down the rhetoric. Capisce?
integrity, why would someone dislike your comment trying to make peace on this blog? Obviously, someone doesn’t want it. See what I mean?
Agent –
Yep. Some people are just miserable people. That’s what happens when a person holds a grudge and cannot let things go.
That’s their choice and it will probably end up killing them.
Agent –
It’s a new day. Rosenblatt has been very civil, and even complimentary, in his replies to me.
His tone and request to you are reasonable.
Whatever that has been said (or alleged to be said) in the past, is in the past.
I respectfully ask that you just say “no” and move on.
Let’s try to move these debates back to being more civil to each other. There has been enough divisiveness in this country.
Thanks! I hope you have a great weekend!
Best…Post…Ever
I would love to see Agent respond to these last few posts from Rosenblatt and integrity matters.
i really hope agent replies to the recent posts from rosenblatt and integrity matters
integrity, perhaps it is a new day between you and Rosenblatt. However, you have not been the object of derision like I have for the past 3-4 years, have not had your moniker hijacked to post ugly remarks and stirring up trouble like about 4-5 leftist posters have done to me. Every post they make to me is an insult or a word parsing exercise designed to attempt to discredit me. Sorry, I don’t speak their language and they don’t speak mine. That puts us all into conflict with every article. Good luck on your posts. I predict it won’t last long.
Agent –
Thanks for your reply. I can understand why you feel the way that you do. I know I have had my share of blowups, especially against Celtica and Libby.
At the end of the day, we can only control our own actions.
I will respectfully ask the others (Ron, Rosenblatt, Confused, Captain Planet, Bob, Dave and anyone else who tend to get “passionate” in their responses) to tone down the name calling, etc.
It has to start somewhere. Why not with us?
For those of us that proclaim to be Christians, we need to try to “turn the other cheek” and forgive as many times as it takes. I know it’s hard. We are going to mess up and blow up on them in the future, just like they will on us.
Let’s leave those times behind us and constantly strive to move forward. Holding a grudge is a choice and it only damages ones-self.
Everybody, thanks for considering and trying!
Agent,
Sometimes you just make me laugh.
integrity, I have a good one for you on email I received today.
Republicans have – 2 Hispanics, 1 African American, 9 Governors, 2 Doctors, 1 Business Mogul, 1 CEO, 5 Senators & 1 woman.
Democrats have – 1 Criminal & 1 Socialist and a few other crazy losers no one has ever heard of. Can there be a clearer choice for our next President?
Agent – That’s good. Don’t forget that the criminal is a liar, too!
They can’t even forecast tomorrow’s weather correctly..never mind trying to forecast a season that is still three months away.
Hey Trust me, I haven’t ever figured out why Colorado State is in charge of predicting how many hurricanes are going to happen in a season and how many will hit land. They have an abysmal record for some time now. As you say, the so called experts cannot even predict weather in a few days let alone a month or two in the future.
Ron, way to go following integrity’s lead. I can’t tell you what I think about you because I would not be following integrity’s lead. Do you think that to be funny?
Agent,
All I said is that you make me laugh sometimes. It was not meant to be an insult.
I have made enough attempts to extend an olive branch to you with no success. Are you honestly willing to accept and stop with insults such as: Liberal, Democrat, Socialist, Progressive, Moderate, low information voter, and Obama defender? (I find those all to be insults since none are true, regardless of what you or anyone else may believe. I am an Independent, period.)
That is a simple yes or no question and includes all of those inaccurate labels. All or nothing. What do you say?
Ron, it was an insult to me when you said I make you laugh. Tell me how that olive branch thing works when you continue to insult me on every post. Do you want me to turn the other cheek and just take it without response? Do you want me to agree with everything you post as if it is gospel? You have enough history on this blog to be shown as a true liberal even though you say you are an Independent. You have choked on those words enough, haven’t you? Anyone who says they are for Social Entitlements and Single Payer Health Insurance is truly a Progressive Socialist no matter how you try to paint yourself. Bob has pointed that out to you on a number of occasions and it went in one ear and out the other. There is not one Conservative bone in your body and you may as well admit it. Be honest for a change. I will not abandon my Conservative beliefs because I know the difference between right and wrong.
Agent,
So, you’re response to a yes/no question is “Ron, it was an insult to me when you said I make you laugh. Tell me how that olive branch thing works when you continue to insult me on every post. Do you want me to turn the other cheek and just take it without response? Do you want me to agree with everything you post as if it is gospel? You have enough history on this blog to be shown as a true liberal even though you say you are an Independent. You have choked on those words enough, haven’t you? Anyone who says they are for Social Entitlements and Single Payer Health Insurance is truly a Progressive Socialist no matter how you try to paint yourself. Bob has pointed that out to you on a number of occasions and it went in one ear and out the other. There is not one Conservative bone in your body and you may as well admit it. Be honest for a change. I will not abandon my Conservative beliefs because I know the difference between right and wrong.”
And you call Rosenblatt a word parser.
Ron, so your response to my reply is to copy my post word for word because you have no original thoughts in your head and then throw in an insult to boot. Perhaps you need psychotherapy for your affliction. When you were in school, did you copy off of another students test answers? I have noticed it is pretty common for liberal posters to repeat what someone else posts before they insult. Do you just say to yourself – Hmm, don’t know what to say so I will just copy everything down and then insult him. That should work. NOT!
Agent – care to comment on my compromise offer regarding me calling out the moniker thieves in consideration for you answering my question? I would like to see if we can reach a mutually amicable solution to our concerns and put those issues to rest once and for all.
Agent,
You just have no clue, do you?
I was making a point that your response was supposed to be either, “Yes” or “No”, not some irrelevant rant trying to detract from my offer.
Let’s try this again, do you want to stop insulting each other or not? I have no problem with either approach.
Please post with either “yes”or “no”.
There’s a difference between a discussion, a debate and an argument. If you go into every post thinking “we’re all in conflict” we can never discuss or debate anything, no matter how hard I try.
Example 1: I asked you to elaborate why you put measurable in quotes. You insulted me instead of answering. I again explained I was merely seeking clarification of what you were trying to say, yet you ignored the question.
Example 2: You said all Prog-Soc/Ath say they’re smarter than people who don’t agree with them, and “we” will tell you so if you don’t agree with our agenda. Clearly I did not do this to Integrity Matters, yet you ignore me when I asked you to confirm I did not use this tactic.
How can we have a discussion about anything if you go into every post on the defensive thinking I’m just looking for an argument, even when I literally tell you that’s not my intent?
So, I ask you again Agent — Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me? If yes – your Prog-Soc/Ath comment was accurate and I apologize for getting off on this tangent. If no – that’s good enough for me and I’ll move on presuming there’s nothing else in your reply that warrants a response.
Rosenblatt, one of your worst qualities is being a word parser and seeking an argument to anything I post on any subject at any time on any article. You don’t accept anything I say and I don’t accept anything you say so let’s just leave it at that.
As I recall, you never did call out the serial trolls directly and merely said you agreed with Ron after he had the courage to do it. That is a fact you cannot ignore. Had you been a man and stepped up to the plate, that might have repaired some of the damage from years of rancorous insulting behavior.
Instead of answering my simple, on-topic, relevant and completely reasonable question, you insult me again!?. Come on.
When I ask IM a question, I get an answer and am asked a follow-up question, which I answer, and so on. He does not insult me and ignore the question, which is why he and I can have civil conversations.
You are driving the negativity here. You negatively call me a word parser yet hypocritically parse my line of “if I find out who posted under your name, I will call out those individuals by name and tell them to stop being so immature” and try to argue that I never stepped up and called them out. Come on.
Let’s try this again. If you say “yes”, then I will apologize to you for harping on this topic even though I think you are 100% wrong. If you say “no”, then I will leave the topic on the floor and not bring it up again. You can easily end this by simply answering yes or no.
Here goes…
Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me, about climate change, how temp’s are measured, et cetera, in our above discourse?
Let’s try this again Rosenblatt for about the 12th time. When have you called out the others on this blog for moniker theft and insulting behavior to me? All you ever said was that you “would do it” if we found out who it was. I may be waiting until December or after before you do it, if ever. I am the one being wronged here, not you. If you want to get along with me, you will have to stop parsing every post with your own slant and you are going to have to call out the ones who regularly steal my moniker to post their hate and insults. All I want is a statement from you to tell those dudes to knock it off. Is that too much to ask? Apparently so in your case.
Ron, I can’t help it if you don’t like my posts. You said I have lied or misspoke multiple times. I am about a thousand behind you buddy. With every post, you dig a deeper hole for yourself. You probably can’t help it if you are from NY, grew up in one of the most liberal states in the union. It is in your genes and no one can tell you any different on any subject. Aren’t you tired yet of the Obama economy, NY running off 500,000 citizens due to the oppressive taxation, regulation? How about you and Planet wanting all fast food restaurants to go away? Over 3 million employed in that industry and you are ready to throw them under the bus. How is that going to make the economy grow?
When have I called them out? I just did in my last post, I did months ago, I also agreed with what Ron wrote about the topic, but apparently none of that is good enough for you.
Doesn’t a blanket statement of “It is wrong – it is immature – it needs to stop – if I find out who did it, I will call them out by name and say this again” suffice? I can’t call them out by name since there’s no proof who is the guilty party/parties.
Okay – here’s a compromise for you. Please write the exact words you want me to post that will appease you on this moniker theft situation. Do not include names of people you think are doing it since it can’t be proven who is really to blame. Just tell me verbatim what you want me to write so you’ll finally put this to rest and I’ll write it to put this matter behind us.
However, this is a compromise. Tit-for-tat.
I will write exactly what you want me to say this one time under one simple condition which is that you answer my reasonable and on-topic question with a simple yes or no. If you do not give me a straight answer to this question, do not expect me to appease your request to call out the others any more than I already have.
Here goes…
Did I ever say or imply to IM that I was smarter than him, or that he was stupid for disagreeing with me, about climate change, how temp’s are measured, et cetera, in our above discourse?
Agent,
You said, “I am about a thousand behind you buddy.”
Provide 3 specific examples where I was wrong, lied and/or misspoke, and did not admit to it when evidence was provided.
Good luck
Agent,
You are the most blatant deflector. We have PROVEN that you have either lied, misspoke or have been wrong multiple times, yet you never admit your error(s). However, you will find fault in someone else or goon some irrelevant rant. If you need examples, please ask.
Louie, I am not familiar with Medved. Is he on XM radio and if so, what station? I have a feeling he is probably not wrong much if he is dealing with leftists on his program. They really don’t have a whole lot to offer except their agenda on entitlements.
Rosenblatt, I will say one thing, you are gifted at dodging and parsing words. It only took about six posts to get Ron to call out the moniker thieves and tell them to knock it off and you are still dodging after a dozen times. Ok, if you want me to acknowledge that you said you weren’t smarter than integrity, you didn’t say you were. I have grown tired of your posts on every Global Warming or Climate Change article posted when you post your fake statistics and stick to them no matter what. You have acted superior to about every Conservative on this blog. If you want to apologize for that, feel free. Following is what you need to say on the moniker thieve issue.
Attention All Moniker Thieves:
All of you need to stop with stealing Agents moniker to post nasty liberal drivel to stir up trouble between Agent and the other posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
All of you need to stop with stealing Agents moniker to post nasty liberal drivel to stir up trouble between Agent and the other posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Similarly,
All of you need to stop with stealing anyone’smoniker to post nasty liberal or conservativedrivel to stir up trouble between posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Random thought time. I listen to Michael Medved on my way home pretty much every night. He’s a conservative talk show host, but not like Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, or Levin. He specifically prioritizes callers who disagree with him, not so he can shout them down but so he can reasonably argue with them. He is willing to admit when he’s wrong and even apologize if someone has misinterpreted something he has said. I don’t agree with 100% of what he says, but I respect his opinion and the way he goes about it.
His mantra? “I. AM. NOT. A. VICTIM.” Even when the cards are against him, he doesn’t blame others but instead accepts personal responsibility and attempts to help others by bettering himself first.
we could all learn from that.
Thanks, Louie. I’ll have to check him out. We definitely need more people like that in our political system. After all, didn’t George Washington purposely put people in his cabinet that disagreed with him to accomplish something similar?
Reasonable discourse and personal responsibility seem to be missing from what I’ve seen and heard across various mediums. I’m glad there’s someone out there bucking the trend.
Agent – if you decide not to take me up on my compromise outlined on September 21, 2015 at 4:58 PM, you can never again bring up your belief that I did not call people out for posting under your name.
In addition, I will take your inaction as a sign of bad-faith that you have no genuine interest in putting past issues behind us, even when I am willing to capitulate to your demand, going so far as to give you the opportunity to literally tell me exactly what I should write that will appease you.
I am doing my best to try and continue having a rational adult discourse with you, but I am not seeing anything close from you yet. Once again, I now wait for your response.
All of you need to stop with stealing Agents moniker to post nasty liberal drivel to stir up trouble between Agent and the other posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Similarly,
All of you need to stop with stealing anyone’smoniker to post nasty liberal or conservative drivel to stir up trouble between posters. This is an Insurance blog and if you don’t have anything intelligent to post, don’t post anything at all. Also, don’t use cuss words in your posts. No place for it on this forum.
Good one Rosenblatt. Only 13 tries to make it happen. By the way, if you want me to have a discussion with you, try not to parse words or repeat a whole post I made before replying. I can’t get Ron to stop doing that and it is completely unnecessary. We can agree to disagree as we do on just about everything, but the word parsing is a no no. Surely, we both live in the USA and the language cannot be that different.
I do what you want and you STILL IMMEDIATELY dig on me in your first sentence. You just can’t let sleeping dogs lie, can you?
Unless I have to pull you back to something you said that we were talking about which you are ignoring, I won’t copy your whole post in my reply.
I’ll do you that favor for you if you do me one favor – stop saying ‘word parsing’ with a negative connotation.
Word parsing simply means I’m analyzing what you posted to discover the meaning of what you wrote. It’s how proper reading comprehension is achieved.
Give that phrase a rest (bonus points if you can tone down your rhetoric and stop telling me I don’t know right from wrong) and I’m sure we can have civil conversations going forward.
Rosenblatt, the English language is interesting. Words mean different things to different people. Apparently, depending on what part of the country you live in, they mean something different. Word parsing is how you object to anything I say on any subject. You look at my post and think, how can I parse his statement to the opposite viewpoint. It is your nature and it is annoying how you twist my words and then you become an ASK HOLE and keep on asking the same tired questions over and over and never get it.
“then you become an ASK HOLE”
I think personal attacks are unprofessional and have no place on this site