Coldest morning in 126 years

Originally posted by mjp2 ↑

Ye Gods man, if you are going to claim a scientific organisation of high repute is full of B.S. you better do better than that.
1. You cannot demonstrate they actually said what you believe, or claim. In fact, looking at the NASA web site, it says the opposite of what you claim. You appear to be 100% wrong with your claims.
2. You cannot provide any link to your claimed website content, so it is impossible to see the context of your reputed claim. That's if what you claim even exists, which point 1. suggests is not the case.

Nevertheless you make the insulting and broad generalisation that the organisation is "full of B.S.". That is nothing short of crude unsubstantiated hyperbole.
And you then have the gall to claim you are not arrogant.

I suggest that the next time you want to make a point, that you
1) keep a record and links to what you claim others are saying, so you can verify what you claim. Otherwise you are raising an unverified straw man argument. Indeed in this case, as far as I can see, you have totally misrepresented NASA and, on the basis of your misrepresentation, claimed them to be "full of B.S.;
2) don't be so arrogant as to claim you have proven something, and that others need to prove you wrong, when in fact you have not even convincingly put your argument, not even presented any substantiable facts, let alone won any argument

It seems to me that your debating approach is at best confused and I can think of some less flattering descriptions. Obnoxious and scurrilous would be another way of describing it. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and simply believe you may have misunderstood or unintentionally misrepresented this.

Expand

Well said MJP2. It's disturbing that the likes of Tapdancer argue that they have more knowledge about climate change and global warming than NASA. In fact they don't. Pure and simple.

what they argue is that their opinion is worth as much or more than the considred view of NASA, clearly a dangerous self delusion.

what is wrong with these folk Mjp2? Are these the kind of folk who believe the moon lamdings were concocted in a big shed in Texas?

I personally don't have the arrogance or science background to argue the case against NASA. I am sure though that if the science of global warmkng and climate change points in a new direction then NASA will notify us of the trend, noting that the science leads them, as opposed to deniers who appear to be led by science outliers and News Corp. Publications, known less than affectionately in Australia as Limited News.