Page 32 of 32 FirstFirst ... 222526272829303132
Results 404 to 416 of 416
  1. #404
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    20,042
    Post Likes
    How about we concentrate on what Mikey has to say? Instead of continually promoting your (questionable) agenda? Does that make any sense to you?

    You blew right past the valid points he made.


    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    How about we concentrate on climate scientists, earth science and atmospheric scientists? Does that make sense to you?
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

  2. #405
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,775
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    How about we concentrate on what Mikey has to say? Instead of continually promoting your (questionable) agenda? Does that make any sense to you?

    You blew right past the valid points he made.
    What points did he make and what did he back them up with?

    You are so funny BB. In something like the AOP forum someone will say they are an engineer or an electrician and people like you will say HVAC is different and needs special training but with climate science I bet you would listen to a dentist if they said what you wanted to hear. LOL
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  3. #406
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,775
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    Funny I looked him up on Wiki and it didn't say anything about tobacco or Exxon, only GE and institutes of higher learning he was associated with. That really doesn't change anything he said now does it. If I say R-410A at 100.8 PSIG = 32 does it really matter who I work for? The fact he didn't care about the subject should tell you he went in with no preconceived notions, apparently you missed that. The fact he was horrified by what he saw should tell yo about the quality of the science he was observing. But no your more concerned who he worked for and didn't even have that right from what I found.

    You don't think that working for the tobacco companies for app e decades if I remember correctly accounts for anything? Do you think the scientists hired by them were right or were just obviously hired guns? What do you think when he spoke at a cancer event where he never brought up the dangers of smoking but wanted to account for it by chaos theory? Doesn't this point out to you that he may just be a hired gun and his scientific opinion means very little?
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  4. #407
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bay Area California
    Posts
    20,042
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    What points did he make and what did he back them up with?

    You are so funny BB. In something like the AOP forum someone will say they are an engineer or an electrician and people like you will say HVAC is different and needs special training but with climate science I bet you would listen to a dentist if they said what you wanted to hear. LOL
    Post #383
    If you were a real tech, you'd solder a relay on that board and call it good to go.

    I do a triple evac with nitro to remove non condensables.

  5. #408
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,775
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BBeerme View Post
    Post #383
    Just a bunch of broad claims that aren't backed up in any way shape or form by him. I have asked him to do so. Maybe you could help him?
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  6. #409
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    7,596
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    You don't think that working for the tobacco companies for app e decades if I remember correctly accounts for anything? Do you think the scientists hired by them were right or were just obviously hired guns? What do you think when he spoke at a cancer event where he never brought up the dangers of smoking but wanted to account for it by chaos theory? Doesn't this point out to you that he may just be a hired gun and his scientific opinion means very little?
    Like I said I looked him up on Wiki and it never said anything about tobacco or Exxon so I have your word for that. In fact the only place I saw where it said that was on the skeptic science site you posted which has it's own agenda by some accounts.

  7. #410
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,775
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    Like I said I looked him up on Wiki and it never said anything about tobacco or Exxon so I have your word for that. In fact the only place I saw where it said that was on the skeptic science site you posted which has it's own agenda by some accounts.
    I will find documentation for his tobacco ties. Maybe the place that says "skeptic science" has its own agenda have their own agenda?
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  8. #411
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,775
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    Like I said I looked him up on Wiki and it never said anything about tobacco or Exxon so I have your word for that. In fact the only place I saw where it said that was on the skeptic science site you posted which has it's own agenda by some accounts.
    Here you go. It has attached links to what I am talking about. That is something you don't find much in conservative or climate denier's sites. Wonder why that is


    https://www.desmogblog.com/2016/01/0...limate-deniers
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  9. #412
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    7,596
    Post Likes
    I posted this on the other Green New Deal thread so just as well post it here. While the article is telling the comments after are even better. This is from 2010 and so are most of the comments but the last few are from 17 and 18 so not new but not 9 years old either. I didn't read all of the comments but quite a few. The back and forth reminded me of some that happens on this site.

    www.masterresource.org/debate-issues/skeptical-science-website/

  10. #413
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,775
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    I posted this on the other Green New Deal thread so just as well post it here. While the article is telling the comments after are even better. This is from 2010 and so are most of the comments but the last few are from 17 and 18 so not new but not 9 years old either. I didn't read all of the comments but quite a few. The back and forth reminded me of some that happens on this site.

    www.masterresource.org/debate-issues/skeptical-science-website/
    Read the article and several comments. I seldom read the comments but will do so later at your suggestion.
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  11. #414
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    7,596
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by pageyjim View Post
    Here you go. It has attached links to what I am talking about. That is something you don't find much in conservative or climate denier's sites. Wonder why that is


    https://www.desmogblog.com/2016/01/0...limate-deniers
    For someone that complains about conservatives only using right wing resources you sure use your share of left wing or should I say far left sites.

    http://mediabiasfactcheck.com/desmog/

  12. #415
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    4,775
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BNME8EZ View Post
    For someone that complains about conservatives only using right wing resources you sure use your share of left wing or should I say far left sites.

    http://mediabiasfactcheck.com/desmog/
    The link I gave you had links to the sources. I pointed out how it supplied them and how rarely that was found on RW sites.

    It sources a university academic health services library.
    Last edited by pageyjim; Today at 02:18 PM.
    Signature removed Violated rule #15

  13. #416
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Beatrice, NE
    Posts
    7,596
    Post Likes
    I think the point is if you go to left wing sites you will find left bias if you go to right wing sites you will find right bias. Agreed?

    One needs to look at both {like the comments section I refereed to earlier} and make up your own mind. If we had true transparency in the media, left and right would both be reporting the same thing. Maybe then it would be easier to find agreement. I don't believe something because it comes from site A or B but because it fits into my experience. When I find others that are in agreement with my position then the probability of being right goes up, if no one agrees then maybe I need to examine my thoughts to see where I missed something, it happens. Some times as I examine my thoughts I find something that solidifies my opinion sometimes I change my mind. To discount what someone says just because you don't agree with what they said in the past is not always the best policy to get to the bottom of an issue especially if that issue is a different one.

Page 32 of 32 FirstFirst ... 222526272829303132

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor MagazineThe place where Electrical professionals meet.