heyrob Loc: Western Washington

Yes I have well more than an eight grade education, I can read and understand what it is I've read. Thanks for your concern though.


Yeah, if you bothered to look at my profile you'd see my occupation, but then again, I'm expecting that you have the ability to read and comprehend. Sorry if I over estimated your ability, I'll try to keep it simple for you, I'm a scientist at a major aerospace company.


Well you do keep coming back don't you? Maybe you've been sniffing too much paint.

You really set yourself up for ridicule don't you?

Have a nice evening Deb. :)

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

Yes there is, and it just wrote that post! :thumbup:

infocus Loc: Australia

Firstly, thank you for visiting our country. I have visited yours about 10 times and also found it very scenic. however if you really paid attention while you were here you would know we are known sheep, kangaroos, hot dry lands, flooding rivers, an alpine area bigger than Switzerland's and people who don't like BS artists. UGG's come from New Zealand. Pay attention.

infocus Loc: Australia

You only signed that post "DEB" What happened to JEN and ROB have they gone missing? Given up on you maybe?
LoL :-D :-D :-D :?:

DEBJENROB Loc: DELRAY BEACH FL

Check out their web site .... UGGAUSTRALIA.COM ..... I don't see New Zealand in the web address .... sorry I was more impressed with New Zealand ....

DEBJENROB Loc: DELRAY BEACH FL

That is not my post .... its heyrob making assumptions ... and he is incorrect ... there is no DEBJENROB .... it is just a series of letter constructs used as an internet id ....

imntrt1 Loc: St. Louis

The difference in heyrob, vs most of us...Is that he has a scientific background and has personally studied the issue. I don't think he falls into the category of "Closed Mind" at all unless you define a closed mind as one that has facts to back up their opinions or theory. In fact your post puts YOU squarely in the sights of a closed mind. When one thinks they are right on an issue and they have facts to back it up, how the hell can you construe that as a closed mind?

DEBJENROB Loc: DELRAY BEACH FL

when 12000 scientist who study climate change write papers about the subject and 97% agree that we are experiencing change and it is likely as a result of human activity .... who should I believe ... heyrob or the 97% ...

imntrt1 Loc: St. Louis

I would believe heyrob after seeing how those 12000 scientists came to their conclusions. My Parrot could give better arguments than you regarding Climate Changes.

papayanirvana Loc: Kauai

UHH... the final place not affected by climate change

hondo812 Loc: Massachusetts

12000 scientists? How about 50 some odd million Americans thinking Obama was the better choice? TWICE! So much for numbers.

I'd be willing to give the scientists their due, except that I am an engineer which essentially means I have to make it actually work. Theories are nice but utility is where the money is. How many scientists were still clinging to the world is flat? geocentric vs heliocentric? History shows that the bulk of "scientists" go with the flow.

I have said it before and I'll say it again...a person can be very smart but people are stupid.

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

It was getting late and I was tired of typing. :-)

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

There is your fallacy right there, if there are 12,000 scientists studying climate change, then you have to include me in that number. After all, I am a scientist, and I have studied the subject, never mind that it is not my field of work. Do you honestly believe that there are 12,000 climatologists on the entire planet? That's rediculas on it's face. Furthermore 97% of all statistics are made up on the spot and yours is proof. However, you used a somewhat honest word there, "likely" which is a bit like the word "but" it tends to discount the statement it is in reference to. I said it before and I'll say it again, science is not about consensus, and consensus is not science. Science is about provable facts, and the whole "man is the reason for the present climate change" theory has not provided even one provable fact. NOT A SINGLE ONE!

So to answer your question, "who should I believe ... heyrob or the 97% ..." well, since your "97% of 12,000" claim is nothing but BS, I suggest you open your eyes, and not believe that stupid statistic or me, but quit swallowing the Kool-Aid you've been gulping and pay more attention to those without a monetary profit interest in the debate. Like any true scientific mind, I seek the facts, not for some profit motive, but to know the truth. When I first began reading about Anthropogenic Global Warming, I had no preconceived ideas, but I did have an inherent distrust of the sort of media hype that was being spoon fed to the public.

I sat down to watch "An Inconvenient Truth" when it came out on DVD and I took notes of all the claims, and predictions Gore was peddling. I only got through about the first hour, and had so many notes that I stopped the DVD and began looking into the claims. It turned out that virtually nothing he claimed in that first hour was accurate, and in many cases were flat out lies. In fact, it turned out that there was a lie, misstated claim, or overblown scare tactic, on average of every 80 seconds, throughout the first hour of that, what can only be described as a crockumentary. I never wasted my time going back and finishing the show, I couldn't bare to watch the guy lie for another minute.

I understand that you have your beliefs, and I have no idea where you got your opinions from, or how much you've actually read and/or from what sources to come to your conclusions. Conversely you don't know my history either, but I do know that the vast majority of those who believe as you do, have obtained your information from sources who are not exactly unbiased. The fact that you would claim that there are 12,000 climate scientists out there, only exemplifies your ignorance of the facts. I can assure you that you would be hard pressed to find 5% of that number doing the sort of research that would make them subject matter experts in the field. And I might guess that your 97% figure might play into those who are receiving their funding from a political body, which would taint their credibility severely.

I found it amusing that the AGW alarmists tried to discredit prominent scientists who disputed the theory, people like Fred Seitz, Fred Singer, Richard Lindzen, Bjorn Lomborg, and countless others, by claiming that they had ties to big oil, or other businesses that might have an interest in the outcome of the debate. While yes, many had at one time, had some connection to those businesses, none were currently receiving any funding from those sources. On the other hand, every prominent scientist on the AGW side of the debate were currently either working for or receiving funding from, some government entity. I find that fact more than just a little telling, and I believe that anyone with an open mind would as well.

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

Nicely put!

infocus Loc: Australia

You don't have to be "sorry" Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. If you like NZ more than Australia who cares? It's not a competition. I like Denmark probably more than any other place in the world. Doesn't mean the others aren't nice too.
If you don't believe UGG boots are from NZ (available in Aussie) just ask a Kiwi. They hate people saying they are Australian.
I am now ending my participation on this thread. I think heyrob and others have convincingly proved their point and I no longer want to argue with an idiot as it brings us down to their level.