By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sguy78 said:
Sqrl said:

That you see this as a competition says more to undermine your arguments than sguy78 was able to do throughout the entire thread.

edit: PS - And for the record so there is no missunderstanding here sguy78, I'm not a fan of the way you approached this debate either. 

@thread topic more generally,

Stealing this from WUWT QOTW:

From a recent interview given by the Chairman of the IPCC, Rajendra K. Pachauri, comes this extremely ironic quote:

Q: Has all that has happened this winter dented the credibility of IPCC?

Rajendra K. Pachauri: I don’t think the credibility of the IPCC can be dented. If the IPCC wasn’t there, why would anyone be worried about climate change?

"Why indeed? …"

 

I don't see what yout issue is with the way I approached this discussion. If something is false, it is exactly that. I am entirely disgusted with this extreme left philosophy of forcing the rest of into playing into their political agenda, and killing my way of life. I don't walk into this insulting people. I just am tired of being told something is a fact, when it has not been proven.

For the sake of avoiding an offshoot debate I'll simply say my disagreement is largely in your presentation of information.

It is my opinion that there are good and bad ways to approach the issue and while I'd not be so arrogant as to claim that my way is the right and perfect way, I do think your approach leaves something to be desired.

In short, my point is that we agree on the final conclusion but how we arrived there and the breadth and depth of information for which we base our conclusions appears to me to be susbstantially different. 



To Each Man, Responsibility