TychoMonolyth
Boreal Curing
nothing to see here
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Have you looked at the North Pole lately?
- Thread starter igrowone
- Start date
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
By the way -
we ALL AREADY KNOW
that
that's where you get Y.O.U.R. climate info.
They actually DID a STUDY at OXFORD about where you get yours.
Everything you claim,
matches theirs.
https://goo.gl/LDJx9G
"The cultural politics of climate change discourse
in UK tabloids
Maxwell T. Boykoff*
James Martin Research Fellow, Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford,
South Parks Road, Oxford, U.K.
... "With a growing
need to engage wider constituencies in awareness and potential behavioral change, it is important to examine
how these influential sources represent climate change for a heretofore understudied segment of
citizenry. This paper links political geographies with cultural issues of identity and discourse, through
claims and frames on climate change in four daily ‘working class’ tabloid newspapers in UK e The
Sun (and News of the World ), Daily Mail (and Mail on Sunday), the Daily Express (and Sunday Express),
and the Mirror (and Sunday Mirror)"
... "Through triangulated Critical Discourse Analysis, investigations of
framing and semi-structured interviews, this project examines representations of climate change in these
newspapers from 2000 through 2006. Data show that news articles on climate change were predominantly
framed through weather events, charismatic megafauna and the movements of political actors and rhetoric,
while few stories focused on climate justice and risk. In addition, headlines with tones of fear, misery and
doom were most prevalent."
..."While these characteristics hold across various tabloid medium (e.g. television: Winston,
2002), the focus is most often on newspapers (Sparks, 2000). Despite that these features
may make coverage of the complex topic of climate change a daunting task, it has been an issue
increasingly covered in the UK tabloid press.
Mass media are an influential and heterogeneous set of non-nation state actors that function
as key conduits to both informal and formal discourses and imaginaries within the spaces of
cultural politics and geopolitics (Castree, 2006; Dalby, 1996). Media contribute to and often
embody articulations of political identity and culture in society (Dittmer, 2005), and significantly
influence ongoing public understanding of climate science and policy (Wilson, 1995)."
So -
it's not like you're confessing anything I and the other readers don't already know about where your "education" comes from.
The one that leaves you hooting that
"Everyody knows, 29% less light going into a rock, makes more than 100% come back out, if a MaGiCaL GaiSSiNeSS,
makes the 29% less
never go in."
https://goo.gl/JnA7XF
And that "Calculating Atmospheric temperature, doesn't require gas law."
And that "Coming up 33 degrees short doesn't mean you're wrong when your fake calculations don't use gas law and
come up 33 degrees short."
https://i.imgur.com/Nk8zT8X.png
we ALL AREADY KNOW
that
that's where you get Y.O.U.R. climate info.
They actually DID a STUDY at OXFORD about where you get yours.
Everything you claim,
matches theirs.
https://goo.gl/LDJx9G
"The cultural politics of climate change discourse
in UK tabloids
Maxwell T. Boykoff*
James Martin Research Fellow, Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford,
South Parks Road, Oxford, U.K.
... "With a growing
need to engage wider constituencies in awareness and potential behavioral change, it is important to examine
how these influential sources represent climate change for a heretofore understudied segment of
citizenry. This paper links political geographies with cultural issues of identity and discourse, through
claims and frames on climate change in four daily ‘working class’ tabloid newspapers in UK e The
Sun (and News of the World ), Daily Mail (and Mail on Sunday), the Daily Express (and Sunday Express),
and the Mirror (and Sunday Mirror)"
... "Through triangulated Critical Discourse Analysis, investigations of
framing and semi-structured interviews, this project examines representations of climate change in these
newspapers from 2000 through 2006. Data show that news articles on climate change were predominantly
framed through weather events, charismatic megafauna and the movements of political actors and rhetoric,
while few stories focused on climate justice and risk. In addition, headlines with tones of fear, misery and
doom were most prevalent."
..."While these characteristics hold across various tabloid medium (e.g. television: Winston,
2002), the focus is most often on newspapers (Sparks, 2000). Despite that these features
may make coverage of the complex topic of climate change a daunting task, it has been an issue
increasingly covered in the UK tabloid press.
Mass media are an influential and heterogeneous set of non-nation state actors that function
as key conduits to both informal and formal discourses and imaginaries within the spaces of
cultural politics and geopolitics (Castree, 2006; Dalby, 1996). Media contribute to and often
embody articulations of political identity and culture in society (Dittmer, 2005), and significantly
influence ongoing public understanding of climate science and policy (Wilson, 1995)."
So -
it's not like you're confessing anything I and the other readers don't already know about where your "education" comes from.
The one that leaves you hooting that
"Everyody knows, 29% less light going into a rock, makes more than 100% come back out, if a MaGiCaL GaiSSiNeSS,
makes the 29% less
never go in."
https://goo.gl/JnA7XF
And that "Calculating Atmospheric temperature, doesn't require gas law."
And that "Coming up 33 degrees short doesn't mean you're wrong when your fake calculations don't use gas law and
come up 33 degrees short."
https://i.imgur.com/Nk8zT8X.png
“We are more sure that greenhouse gas is causing climate change than we are that smoking causes cancer.”
Kate Marvel - Columbia University & NASA Atmospheric Scientist with many peer reviewed publications in journals such as Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature Climate Change & Journal of Climate.
Kate Marvel - Columbia University & NASA Atmospheric Scientist with many peer reviewed publications in journals such as Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature Climate Change & Journal of Climate.
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
"Thim guvurmint min wood'n nevur LYE two ME, thay got GuvurminT jobs & bow ties, an thair own parkin playsis at werk!"
Show us your "many peer reviewed publications in journals" explaining how "Pot's like heroin cause thim guvurmint fellurs woodn' nevur LyE!"
Purfessor "More comes out evur time less goes in, cause less wint' in!"
Show us your "many peer reviewed publications in journals" explaining how "Pot's like heroin cause thim guvurmint fellurs woodn' nevur LyE!"
Purfessor "More comes out evur time less goes in, cause less wint' in!"
Last edited:
St. Phatty
Active member
Thank you for the inspiration.
For new folks who aren't trolls, you just click on "My IC" up there at the top, then -
I
Ignignokt
I noticed that the next post after 'nothing to see here' was in bold
There is nothing more that these Alex Jones types can't stand is being ignored.
I noticed that the next post after 'nothing to see here' was in bold
There is nothing more that these Alex Jones types can't stand is being ignored.
Alex who?
St. Phatty
Active member
Smith ... Johnson ... something.
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
Keep hiding and whistling like you're walking past a graveyard.I noticed that the next post after 'nothing to see here' was in bold
There is nothing more that these Alex Jones types can't stand is being ignored.
Better yet mention your belief in the fact that 29% less energy into the planet makes more than 100% come out if a magical gassiness
makes the 29% never go in.
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
Whenever one of you trembling "activists" grows the guts to start talking about how you believe 29% less energy in makes more than 100% come out by virtue of the fact
the 29% never go in
you go ahead.
Tell everyone here in your own words how you came to believe 29% less energy in
means ANYTHING but - 29% less energy out.
BWaH Ha HaH Ha Hah HaH!
"Yeah! Evur time thim magical gaisses dun made less go IN,
thay dun made MOAR come OWT!
https://i.imgur.com/oj8igus.png
the 29% never go in
you go ahead.
Tell everyone here in your own words how you came to believe 29% less energy in
means ANYTHING but - 29% less energy out.
BWaH Ha HaH Ha Hah HaH!
"Yeah! Evur time thim magical gaisses dun made less go IN,
thay dun made MOAR come OWT!
https://i.imgur.com/oj8igus.png
Last edited:
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
You just worry about how you're going to explain to people
"Every time the magical gaissiness dun made less energy to into a rock,
it made more come out till now that 29% ain't goin in,
it's making more than 100% of available energy
come back out! YaW!"
LoL!
"Every time the magical gaissiness dun made less energy to into a rock,
it made more come out till now that 29% ain't goin in,
it's making more than 100% of available energy
come back out! YaW!"
LoL!
So you and 29% are still pretty close huh?
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
You think
you wish you had the manhood
to talk about your belief
magical insulation makes more than 100% of available energy come out of a rock,
by making 29% LESS go into it.
It's your church, YOU explain it!
BWAH, Ha-HaH Ha Ha-Hah!
you wish you had the manhood
to talk about your belief
magical insulation makes more than 100% of available energy come out of a rock,
I think he said he was 28% sure.
by making 29% LESS go into it.
It's your church, YOU explain it!
BWAH, Ha-HaH Ha Ha-Hah!
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
Do you want to bear testimony of your belief the entire planet except your church,
calculates the temperature of the planet wrong?
There can't be but ONE correct surface temperature for the planet, and your church is the one with the wrong answer, so that means you need to explain how you think they can ''calculate'' the temperature of the planet not using gas law to resolve temperature of gases and coming up 33 degrees short, and several HUNDRED degrees short for Venus one planet over.
Your church's answer to that is that the men who flew there and landed 13 craft on Venus don't know what they're doing and that the laws of physics work differently on Venus.
Yet as I showed you on Wikipedia there's nothing there under ''Scientific Findings'' for the MORE than a DOZEN craft LANDED there.
WTF who swiped the news about the magical gaissiness you're itching to bear testimony of??? Dark Illuminati? BWAH HA Ha HaH!
Whur'd the news abowt the magical gaissines goe??
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera#Scientific_findings
Tell us.
T.e.l.l. us.
Who dun run awf with tha grownd brakin news abowt tha
magical gassiness
what dun made more light come out of a rock.
Evurtime what?
Evur time,
it dun made less go in.
Grab a soap box and expose the big conspiracy of
who took off with the story about the magicalness of the gassiness, from Wikipedia.
https://i.imgur.com/3xtblWM.png
LoL.
We'll wait for you to scratch up some story about what happened to it, and "thim no-good fellurs what's dun swipe't tha trewth!"
Or is your specialty, explaining the part about how
"Every time the magical insulation makes less energy go into the Earth, it makes more come out."
You don't have to be coy. You do, LoL - have to deal with people all over the world, seeing what you say you believed was real.
https://i.imgur.com/ZLJqPZH.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera#Scientific_findings
"Scientific findings
There were many scientific findings about Venus from the data retrieved by the Venera probes. For example, after analyzing the radar images returned from Venera 15 and 16, it was concluded that the ridges and grooves on the surface of Venus were the result of tectonic deformations."
Who stole the critical information about the magical gassiness that makes Venus hundreds of times warmer than gas law predicts it will be?
Oh that's right even the most cursory search proves the predicted temperature of Venus to be basically, EXACTLY what the dozen + craft we landed there SHOW it to be.
LoL. Your handlers,
the ones who brainwashed you into belief that a magical gassiness
makes more energy come out of Earth every time the same cooling GHGs
make less reach it to come back out and warm it,
also LIED to you about the temperature of Venus being different because "The laws of physics don't work the same, one planet over on Venus.''
All this is your story, not real science's story.
Explain it. People are watching from their computers all over the world. You can convert hundreds.
We'll all wait. Gather your climatastrophological charts and explain it all away.
Where the information is from more than a dozen craft, showing Venus is a different temperature than gas law states it should be.
Oh that's right it's freshman pilot training to know how to calculate the temperature of Earth's average surface temperature, and Venus' too.
And Venus' temperature matches calculations exactly.
Gather your data maybe you're gonna be that reluctant warrior who finally convinces real science that it's possible to calculate the temperatures of gases and atmospheres - without using gas mass/energy law.
And that the entire planet except your church have the surface temperature of the Earth, wrong.
And that it's not true that the proper way to calculate the planet is that "29% less energy IN, means 29% less OUT.''
You could be that voice that finally makes us all see how 29% less energy IN
makes MORE than 100% come back out. By never going in.
calculates the temperature of the planet wrong?
There can't be but ONE correct surface temperature for the planet, and your church is the one with the wrong answer, so that means you need to explain how you think they can ''calculate'' the temperature of the planet not using gas law to resolve temperature of gases and coming up 33 degrees short, and several HUNDRED degrees short for Venus one planet over.
Your church's answer to that is that the men who flew there and landed 13 craft on Venus don't know what they're doing and that the laws of physics work differently on Venus.
Yet as I showed you on Wikipedia there's nothing there under ''Scientific Findings'' for the MORE than a DOZEN craft LANDED there.
WTF who swiped the news about the magical gaissiness you're itching to bear testimony of??? Dark Illuminati? BWAH HA Ha HaH!
Whur'd the news abowt the magical gaissines goe??
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera#Scientific_findings
Tell us.
T.e.l.l. us.
Who dun run awf with tha grownd brakin news abowt tha
magical gassiness
what dun made more light come out of a rock.
Evurtime what?
Evur time,
it dun made less go in.
Grab a soap box and expose the big conspiracy of
who took off with the story about the magicalness of the gassiness, from Wikipedia.
https://i.imgur.com/3xtblWM.png
LoL.
We'll wait for you to scratch up some story about what happened to it, and "thim no-good fellurs what's dun swipe't tha trewth!"
Or is your specialty, explaining the part about how
"Every time the magical insulation makes less energy go into the Earth, it makes more come out."
You don't have to be coy. You do, LoL - have to deal with people all over the world, seeing what you say you believed was real.
https://i.imgur.com/ZLJqPZH.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera#Scientific_findings
"Scientific findings
There were many scientific findings about Venus from the data retrieved by the Venera probes. For example, after analyzing the radar images returned from Venera 15 and 16, it was concluded that the ridges and grooves on the surface of Venus were the result of tectonic deformations."
Who stole the critical information about the magical gassiness that makes Venus hundreds of times warmer than gas law predicts it will be?
Oh that's right even the most cursory search proves the predicted temperature of Venus to be basically, EXACTLY what the dozen + craft we landed there SHOW it to be.
LoL. Your handlers,
the ones who brainwashed you into belief that a magical gassiness
makes more energy come out of Earth every time the same cooling GHGs
make less reach it to come back out and warm it,
also LIED to you about the temperature of Venus being different because "The laws of physics don't work the same, one planet over on Venus.''
All this is your story, not real science's story.
Explain it. People are watching from their computers all over the world. You can convert hundreds.
We'll all wait. Gather your climatastrophological charts and explain it all away.
Where the information is from more than a dozen craft, showing Venus is a different temperature than gas law states it should be.
Oh that's right it's freshman pilot training to know how to calculate the temperature of Earth's average surface temperature, and Venus' too.
And Venus' temperature matches calculations exactly.
Gather your data maybe you're gonna be that reluctant warrior who finally convinces real science that it's possible to calculate the temperatures of gases and atmospheres - without using gas mass/energy law.
And that the entire planet except your church have the surface temperature of the Earth, wrong.
And that it's not true that the proper way to calculate the planet is that "29% less energy IN, means 29% less OUT.''
You could be that voice that finally makes us all see how 29% less energy IN
makes MORE than 100% come back out. By never going in.
Last edited:
I'm guessing that you aren't versed in scientific research.
I'll also venture a guess that, because of that, you are not reading findings accurately.
I'm sure you're misinterpreting values if you are hung up on others proving your point.
Therefore I conclude that any researcher that is using your 29% data has a better grip on it than you.
I'll also venture a guess that, because of that, you are not reading findings accurately.
I'm sure you're misinterpreting values if you are hung up on others proving your point.
Therefore I conclude that any researcher that is using your 29% data has a better grip on it than you.
this is an interesting account
reading through some of the other posts in other threads, different styles are evident
in short, it's not 1 person, more than 1
TychoMonolyth
Boreal Curing
I just let him yell into an empty bucket.
