 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Energy Forum » Today Even Mountains Are Not Necessarily What They... |
|
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Last Post... |
 Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
For all those fools think that the photos of glaciers
are proof of anything more than that they exist,
check the photos of the 50 year old woman here:
www.thepunch.com.au/articles/my-life-as-an-image-retoucher/?referrer=email&source=eDM_newspulse.
Now eat your shirts.
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
[quote]Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
[/quote]
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:18 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
[/quote]
Now you really are BULLSHIT |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:53 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 2:18 pm, richpissypants <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshopฎ,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT
[/quote]
ROFLMAO -
More ignorance from the wet diaper kid.
Google or call your computer dealer and ask
them about Photoshopฎ Maybe they will
also teach you how to post properly
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:07 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:31 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 3:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT-
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation
[/quote]
ROTFLMAO
Where did I say that?
Poor old pissy pants straining like gnats
remenicent of sourberries just another
oh so clever one, citing a snippet from a
signature, divorced from context and
without any reference to the subject. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bert Hyman... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In
news:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_post at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote]Now eat your shirts.
[/quote]
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
Good luck with it.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert at (no spam) iphouse.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Ouroboros Rex... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:08 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Last Post... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 7:01 pm, Tom P <werot... at (no spam) freent.dd> wrote:
[quote]Last Post wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT-
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation
ROTFLMAO
Where did I say that?
Can't you even remember what you wrote?
"For all those fools think that the photos of glaciers
are proof of anything more than that they exist,
check the photos of the 50 year old woman here"
So what are you saying?
[/quote]
ROTFLMAO
If you need a translater go back to kindergarden
[quote]You really are pathetic. You haven't even got the guts to say straight
out what your slimey innuendo is implying.
[/quote]
Did you even see the third post before you
rushed to illustrate your imbecility?? Of
course NOT!!!!!
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
There is no innuendo there little Tom Pricker
no piper's son
Tom and Richie two pissers without a pot
between them much less a brain
There are three types of people that you
can_not_talk_into_behaving_well. The
stupid, the religious fanatic, and the evil.
1- The stupid aren't smart enough to follow the
logic of what you say. You have to tell them
what is right in very simple terms. If they do
not agree, you will never be able to change
their mind.
2- The religious fanatic: If what you say goes
against their religious belief, they will cling to
that belief even if it means their death.
3- There is no way to reform evil- not in a
million years. There is no way to convince
the anthropogenic global warming alarmists,
the terrorists, serial killers, paedophiles, and
predators to change their evil ways, They
knew what they were doing was wrong, but
knowledge didn't stop them. It only made
them more careful in how they went about
performing their evil deeds. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Ouroboros Rex... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:42 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Last Post wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 3:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT-
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation
ROTFLMAO
Where did I say that?
[/quote]
Playing stupid, #1 hobby of right wingers everywhere. lol |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Tom P... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:01 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Last Post wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 3:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT-
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation
ROTFLMAO
Where did I say that?
[/quote]
Can't you even remember what you wrote?
"For all those fools think that the photos of glaciers
are proof of anything more than that they exist,
check the photos of the 50 year old woman here"
So what are you saying?
You really are pathetic. You haven't even got the guts to say straight
out what your slimey innuendo is implying. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Tom P... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:09 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Last Post wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 7:01 pm, Tom P <werot... at (no spam) freent.dd> wrote:
Last Post wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT-
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation
ROTFLMAO
Where did I say that?
Can't you even remember what you wrote?
"For all those fools think that the photos of glaciers
are proof of anything more than that they exist,
check the photos of the 50 year old woman here"
So what are you saying?
ROTFLMAO
If you need a translater go back to kindergarden
You really are pathetic. You haven't even got the guts to say straight
out what your slimey innuendo is implying.
Did you even see the third post before you
rushed to illustrate your imbecility?? Of
course NOT!!!!!
I'm looking at it right now and all I can see is your brainless drivel.[/quote]
[quote] No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
The camera cannot lie, only the person manipulating the picture.[/quote]
You are assuming anyway that only digital cameras exist. However,
digital cameras are an extremely modern invention. Photoshop only came
on the market less than 20 years ago.
There are photographs of the glaciers in the Alps taken long before
there were digital cameras or even computers. They show the history of
the shrinking glaciers over a period of nearly 150 years.
What does Photoshop have to do with all this?
Either you are saying that all the original photos have been magically
spirited away and replaced with retouched ones showing lots of fake
glaciers.
A major undertaking, as not only do the original photographs have to
be digitized before being retouched, they have to be photographed again
onto negative glass plates in order to make the forgery convincing.
Or you are saying that the glaciers are really still there and that all
the modern photos have been retouched to make it look like the ice
disappeared. This must be a gargantuous undertaking, tracking down
every single one of the millions of photographs of the Alps made every
year and retouching them all with Photoshop. Thousands of AGW-crazed
scientists are employed at the taxpayers expense to undertake this
forgery. Presumably tourists who visit the Alps and who might notice
that the ice really has disappeared and could spread the word are gagged
and bound?
DO please tell us which in your most esteemed opinion is the truth. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| tj Frazir... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:23 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
The math they never show about global warming crap.
The 5.7 quadrillion ton sky has 2 trillion trees and a sea that eats 5
trillion con co2 per year.
The sky has 700 trillion tons of co2 and mans 30 billion ton is too
small to measure at 5 millonths
http://community.webtv.net/GravityPhysics/WhaleSteamEngineA |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| boo-radley... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 7:10 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 6:09 pm, Tom P <werot... at (no spam) freent.dd> wrote:
[quote]Last Post wrote:
On Oct 30, 7:01 pm, Tom P <werot... at (no spam) freent.dd> wrote:
Last Post wrote:
On Oct 30, 3:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT-
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation
ROTFLMAO
Where did I say that?
Can't you even remember what you wrote?
"For all those fools think that the photos of glaciers
are proof of anything more than that they exist,
check the photos of the 50 year old woman here"
So what are you saying?
ROTFLMAO
If you need a translater go back to kindergarden
You really are pathetic. You haven't even got the guts to say straight
out what your slimey innuendo is implying.
Did you even see the third post before you
rushed to illustrate your imbecility?? Of
course NOT!!!!!
I'm looking at it right now and all I can see is your brainless drivel.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
The camera cannot lie, only the person manipulating the picture.
You are assuming anyway that only digital cameras exist. However,
digital cameras are an extremely modern invention. Photoshop only came
on the market less than 20 years ago.
There are photographs of the glaciers in the Alps taken long before
there were digital cameras or even computers. They show the history of
the shrinking glaciers over a period of nearly 150 years.
What does Photoshop have to do with all this?
Either you are saying that all the original photos have been magically
spirited away and replaced with retouched ones showing lots of fake
glaciers.
A major undertaking, as not only do the original photographs have to
be digitized before being retouched, they have to be photographed again
onto negative glass plates in order to make the forgery convincing.
Or you are saying that the glaciers are really still there and that all
the modern photos have been retouched to make it look like the ice
disappeared. This must be a gargantuous undertaking, tracking down
every single one of the millions of photographs of the Alps made every
year and retouching them all with Photoshop. Thousands of AGW-crazed
scientists are employed at the taxpayers expense to undertake this
forgery. Presumably tourists who visit the Alps and who might notice
that the ice really has disappeared and could spread the word are gagged
and bound?
DO please tell us which in your most esteemed opinion is the truth.
[/quote]
Don't waste you time with this shit-for-brains, he can't tell the
difference between climate and weather.
But we thank him for all his tax dollars to study GW! LOL |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| richp... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 30, 12:31 pm, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 30, 3:07 pm, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:18 am, richp <travelingman95... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:06 am, Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
On Oct 30, 1:50 pm, Bert Hyman <b... at (no spam) iphouse.com> wrote:
Innews:14d8b57c-85bf-4697-96ca-62ae4e7cef1b at (no spam) j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com
Last Post <last_p... at (no spam) primus.ca> wrote:
Now eat your shirts.
What's your point?
Because one photo has been altered, therefore all photos have been
altered?
That's an interesting foundation on which to build your argument.
No Bert:
It merely demonstrates how, with Photoshop,
one can do anything your little heart desires.
Ergo-- the camera CAN lie!!
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
Now you really are BULLSHIT-
Prove that photoshop has been used to doctor photos of mountain
glaciers melting..
The burden of proof is on you since you made the allegation
ROTFLMAO
Where did I say that?
Poor old pissy pants straining like gnats
remenicent of sourberries just another
oh so clever one, citing a snippet from a
signature, divorced from context and
without any reference to the subject.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Standard reply from last post |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Nov 28, 2009 4:08 am
|
|