Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 222. (Read 636458 times)

One year does not a trend make.  Look at the overall evidence.  And then just use common sense.  Humans put so much crap into the environment it MUST be affecting it.

"Climate change" ain't science, it's a part of the globalisation political agenda.

The degenerates at the BBC are always pushing global warming at every opportunity, along with all the other globalist fucknuts

Miley Cyrus was a baby and Bill Clinton had just been inaugurated the last time this happened: For the first time in 20 years, the USA saw more record cold temperatures than record hot temperatures in 2013, according to statistics from the National Climatic Data Center.

“For the first year since 1993, there were more daily record lows than daily highs that were either tied or set in 2013,” reported Weather Channel meteorologist Guy Walton, who keeps track of the data from the climate center.

Through Dec. 28, there have been 11,852 daily record lows in 2013, compared with 10,073 daily record highs, according to Walton.

A “daily” record occurs when a specific location sets a record high or low temperature for a particular day; other types of records include monthly and all-time.

Walton said that an unusually cold spring was the main factor in the “cool” 2013.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/12/31/record-cold-temperatures/4264237/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is settled!

I am not sure how it would be figured out that comically personifying ultra-zealot warmers would be trolling and worthy of being banned, because
A)  Anybody that would ban an extreme warmer must be a Denier
B)  there are actually lots of ultra zealot warmers floating around now that the sea level has raised eighty feet
C)  Banners should be banned, if they don't follow proper banning procedure.  The only smart way to do this is to have a High Priest of Reddit Banning, who has a staff and a rod that will comfort you.

Only those infidels marked by His Settled Science shall be banned.

All is well.

As I stated before, I also don't agree that banning people outright for their views is the right choice. That said, the rules over there seem to be very simple: whatever your position on a given subject, be prepared to present peer reviewed sources. That is the position of the mods there and is stated in the rules; it is a science sub after all. No one is going to be banned for that. On the other hand, if all you can do is troll the forum, banning seems like a good enough choice.

Good question.  So if you repent of your sins and do penance, pledging to never use more than one light bulb for a year, and that only a twisty noodle bulb, recite the pledge, and show that although a sinnner, you yearn for salvation, you can get back in and post from time to time a humble...

Amen.

Yes, but how would users get access back to the forum subs??? It certainly not fair to them. Life is not fair until you make shit happen as my grandfather use to tell me.

I am against banning banning. If this is what they believe is right let them. This is a petty fight As long as they don't (that is the next step, rewind to my other posts) try to have their cancerous radioactive warming breath keeping others on other platform to express themselves; and THAT is their ultimate goal: to go beyond REDDIT and shut anyone with a different viewpoint.

Yes, no one likes trolls. I even troll my own thread from time to time thinking I am a comedian. But pretending every scientists who do not believe their dogma should be banned is... not logical. Some very famous Nobel dude was like "err.. Nah! We need more proof!" And even him got the "He is senile! He doesn't know what he is talking about" treatment.

That was not fair.

I believe that is violation of Reddits policies and they can be banned, I will have to talk to one of the main guys there.

So if we go over there and act like crazier than shit warmers, like triple every warmer warming number they got they are gonna kick us out?

I mean, that's plain stupid.

I mean, we could be like to warmers what cheech and chong were to dope smokers.  Like, you know, start a fund to send carbon neutral equipment down to those good folks stranded at the South Pole.

Bicycles.  

Here's the party.

http://www.reddit.com/r/climate/

They are banning anyone who do not agree with them exactly to their exact theory. So you could agree there are some real impact on nature from mankind but then you add ''Maybe not just humans, some other variables could...'' BOOM! You are out!

Science has been settled by real scientists....

That is easily definable.  To post on Reddit you preface your comments with an oath of allegiance to a creed of Warmers (we all know that Man's CO2 pollution has set the planet on a thousand year warming, which only urgent action now can abate), then periodically interject into your posts affirmations of the belief structure.  This is fairly easy to do.  You can randomly use the following.

Urgent action is needed now.


the Earth has a fever
People must change
the poor cuddly polar bears
the hurricanes will be more severe
massive deaths through climate induced migration
the islands will be drowned
the melting icecaps
we killed the coral reefs
the cathrate guns

Suggest sparing use of phrases such as "Hang the deniers from the highest tree" for maximum effectiveness.  Interject as alternates, hints about the greater earth-friendliness of Vegan Beer, whenever people are drinking beer.

In fact, it may be our duty to develop a Survival Guide For the New Gestapo Reddit Climate Forum, in which anyone can wink-wink get by without their words being sent to the eternal damnation.  A mockery of their very religion by some appearing even more vigilantly vigilant, is what is called for.  If someone dares to suggest the planet will heat up by 3C, shrilly denounce him as a Denier and call to the multitude that verily, unless they repent now, 12-15C will be the fever set up on the earth, but close the jeremiah with a call for salvation, and redemption, for the few that hear the Word.

But there is a lot of science that is done which is mostly ignored because it just isn't that important or relevant.

As I said, once the funding for this religion dries up, these climatologists will be back to mostly talking to themselves in a mirror.

So they are banning people who disagree about that humans are creating climate changes?

Well, would it be too much to ask for them to get themselves rescued on some kind of carbon neutral thing?  There's just something about that fossil fuel burning rescue chopper that does not seem right.

I wanna see them do it with sails or burning wood.

Seriously.

That damn preaching can come after they earn the right to do some preaching by way of their own behavior.

Shackleton had a lesser carbon footprint that those people for sure

Let them walk out, like Shackleford did a century ago, saving his entire crew after the ice crushed his ship.

Global warming scientists forced to admit defeat... because of too much ice: Stranded Antarctic ship's crew will be rescued by helicopter
Chris Turney, a climate scientist and leader of the expedition, was going to document 'environmental changes' at the pole
In an interview he said he expected melting ice to play a part in expedition
MV Akademik Schokalskiy still stuck among thick ice sheet 1,500 nautical miles south of Hobart, the Tasmanian capital
Called for help at 5am Christmas morning after becoming submerged in ice
Australia's back-up ship, Aurora Australis could not break through

hey went in search evidence of the world’s melting ice caps, but instead a team of climate scientists have been forced to abandon their mission … because the Antarctic ice is thicker than usual at this time of year.

The scientists have been stuck aboard the stricken MV Akademik Schokalskiy since Christmas Day, with repeated sea rescue attempts being abandoned as icebreaking ships failed to reach them.

Now that effort has been ditched, with experts admitting the ice is just too thick. Instead the crew have built an icy helipad, with plans afoot to rescue the 74-strong team by helicopter.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2531159/Antarctic-crew-build-ice-helipad-help-rescuers.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will NEVER feel sorry for those people. I mean GPS, real time weather pattern evolution and 1000s of other tools these tools had access too, beyond any common mortals. They put their scientific mind in a box and decided for a leap of faith in honor of their godless religion. I want them to be safe and sound. They have families who love them.

I just wish they will grow a pair when other scientists will make fun of them on their way back home.

...I couldn't stand jr high and high school...

As I see it, there is no "debate on global warming" it is a false simplification generated for political reasons.  For example there may be at least a dozen "debates" on various  phenomena and their causes under this umbrella heading.  The serious flaw is the gross simplification that phenomena grouped loosely under the heading 'climate change' are attributable largely to carbon dioxide.

This is about as logical as saying good people go to church, and if they do not they are bad people and do bad things.  Then simplify that again to specify 'and they go to this particular church' and you've got a pretty good comparable.be

I believe that as far as exercises in understanding the nature of scientific method, there is virtually no part or aspect of 'global warming' that can be used, as it has been that bastardized by belief patterns.  Thus, there is no way that it can or should be part of training or teaching of science - no more than creationism.

Note that this actually has nothing to do with whether some aspects are 'true or false' and certainly does not argue against teaching the known effects of co2 concentration in an planetary atmosphere, as long as the limitations of the experiments are well understood.

There should always be two sides of a story or a debate, what reddit is doin is not democratic at all, and please dont get me started on democracy
we already know democracy does not even exist anywhere.

To fully understand a point we should be able to hear both sides and try to pick and understand details from both, if everyone does that
that skews the information, thats why i dont like debating or listening to people talk or tell me stuff in general, also why i never liked
going to school and learning from those idiot teachers.