Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

Then the lads went and made entirely the wrong defence by not understanding what Loss % of GDP is, by trying to compare actual $$ cost without considering an others like more **** to destroy.

if you want to get into weakening structures, you'd be at it all our life, surveys would be needed

 

How many young trees (50 years or so) have blown over recently, or modern buildings (advanced engineering) have collapsed?

Remember Seven Oaks being reduced to One Oak a few years back?
I would think most (if not all) of the bridges and buildings you have seen washed away recently have been 100+ years old.

They have not stood the test of time, they have suffered through time.

 

OK

 

Now that you have finally looked into a chart you have poisted, maybe you can tell me why don't he include the whole timeframe of the financial data?

 

It's fruitless to focus on that considering the wider discussion as I have said, it was anecdotal reference, I only argued it because of the volatile reaction to it in lieu of actually discussing the topic, they latched on to that.

 

TT I dont know what you said, but just making up stories about Cherry picking, is not useful, I dont explain to a fish why I feed it and I wont explain to you why a circle is round. When you finally see climate cycles in that chart, then I'll take you a bit more seriously

 

You really are a beut. So you only posted a chart that you hadn't researched or understand its flaws just for the reaction it would get?????
Or
You posted a flawed chart without checking because it suited your argument and now its been shredded you suddenly claim this.

I will leave it for the sane people to decide!

Sisu, at least with diego you have finally found somebody where you can genuinely feel intellectually superior.

No doubt you will carry on with your self delusion.

 

I tend to read most of the links with an open mind, you should try it

 

The US had far worse extreme weather over 100 years ago.
No trend over 100 years but the 1800s and early 1900s made a mocker of today's hurricanes. The extreme weather just has no basis in reality. No they resort to tring to say "oh look we told you" whilst avoiding El Nino and the Pacific heat blob, that's been heating up the ocean for nearly 2 years, that has nothing to do with CAGW.
These natural events affected the global average temp for 2013 2014 and 2015 and the pacific heat is only dissipating now in Jan 2016, the loonies are trying to claim there is hot air in the "high arctic" pushing down the cold air Pseudoscience

2 natural phenomenon have been ****ing with us for the past 2 years.. NOAA and NASA never mentioned that notable warmth in Global Average temp for the first 9 months of 2015 was because of the blob, and for the last 3 months El Nino also did a job.

Manhattan used to have Hog Island before a massive hurricane wiped it from the map. in the late 1800s
How someone can disconnect this from the global warming mantra and claim more unusual weather is unrelated and global warming.. is beyond me.

please log in to view this image

CO2 has no bearing on hurricanes whatsoever, fact.


The hottest year, in terms of MMclimate change, is bollocks, just as using 1997\98 as proof of MMclimate change.

More smoke and mirrors after last year, (scientifically) claiming a record when the science said no. A margin too small to count as a signal, as if we can measure the global temperature from 1500 land stations to 3 hundreths of a degree anyway, et the NASA director said it was a record, knowing it wasn't It was a political statement not a scientific one, who pays him who funds NASA

To even suggest we are that accurate is a joke, and yet, people on here have repeated that lie to me as a fact.

 

I am wearing glasses but I look over the rim when you post so I cant focus on text, I just see manic laughy faces.

please log in to view this image

 

no answers yet again, yoiu cannot explain why he choose that time frame because deep down you know why but are afraid to admit it, doublethink is very useful in the short term but won't help you recover.

As for climate cycles in that chart,I cab see some but do you really want me to post it again so everyone can see your refusal to answer the question on that as well?

 

TT you're a mad thing, after your hounding me over my dislike of holocaust deniers, you kinda creep me out. Please dont bother replying to me and I wont bother you

 

Couldn't do that without fossil fuels.. wind farms are a ****ing joke.

please log in to view this image

How much will this sort of thing jack up prices?

read somewhere 5 million OAPs in Britain have to turn down the thermo for fear of bills, shameful ****ing ****. All thanks to "global warming", great, global warming is freezing the old to death

 

I can't do it for all links as he spams the board with so many ( especially when he is feeling particularly vulnerable) but I do for some eg the pielke one, hence me pointing out the flaws in its methodology.
Why do you feel I don't have an open mind just because of that, Surely that says more about you than me?

 

Europe imports 600 billion of FFs and its unsustainable. Am sure that is entirely unrelated.
#theory

 

@Diego Did I not tell you if you talk to him he will just talk about me.

Like a jilted bird he is, "bunny boiler"

 

Woo hoo and we are back to holocaust deniers and not reading my posts again. The day long meltdown is finally complete!

 

The post from Diego was about you, you daft insecure twat.

 

You asked me if I would ban a holocaust denier, I said yes, and you hounded me for a week over it, "why? You claim to be enlightened" or some ****e, as if I was treating holocaust deniers unfairly.

Creepy

 

No it wasn't "I tend to read most of the links with an open mind, you should try it"

You are a sack of slinkies falling down stairs