Hurricane Season Predictions by the "Experts" - Could be 'Extreme'

I'll also note he called you, a singular person, a liar. You called all Democrats crybabies.

 

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AEoHz56jWGY&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AEoHz56jWGY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

Mojo: Wild, unfounded claim about something
Everybody else: Prove it
Mojo: Some nonsensical response about name calling usually accompanied by a gif that has nothing to do with anything
Everybody else:

 

Succinct.

 

"You're a liar."

"You're a crybaby."

I dunno, same level of attack to me. If I called you a crybaby for whining about personal attacks, would that be a personal attack?

 

Did you or did you not make a completely untrue statement?

 

someone who steals=thief
someone who lies=liar

 

On the topic this thread has morphed into, that of lying and debate decorum, I will not be lectured by someone who regularly puts forth arguments totally devoid of factual basis. I am not a Democrat and as such, I don't suffer from their inability to call out people spreading demonstrably false information. If I were Obama, I would have said that your statement was "factually not true" and tried to find common ground with you. Fortunately, I am a free thinking independant who is willing and able to call you out for the intellectually dishonest statements you regularly make.

If you want to continue to make statements without basis in fact, you will continue to be called a liar. The moderators haven't said or done anything to me because they know you are lying just as well as everyone else does. For God's sake, your most compelling argument on the topic of global warming is a fictional picture of what the Earth might have looked like 12,000 years ago. If that isn't the most intellectually dishonest argument on that topic, then the original post in this thread is.

If you want to have a reasoned discussion based on facts and available evidence, I'm your huckleberry. I would love to have a logical discussion with you on any topic at all. I will be happy to refrain from even the hint of name calling so long as you refrain from saying things that are simply not true. I rather suspect you will ignore this post altogether since you don't have anything based on logic, reason, fact, or available evidence, but (glutton for punishment that I am) I am willing to give you yet ANOTHER chance for such a discussion.

However, if you post lies, you know what my response will be.

 

(Disclaimer: I did not call you a jackass, I just posted a picture, which left everyone to make of that what they wanted)

 

Please note that the image behind the spoiler tag does not refer to anyone in particular. I just found it humorous and thought I would share...

Spoiler

 

People, and especially businesses, rely on hurricane forecasts for more than political pissing matches about global warming. I don't think the "so-called hurricane experts" have an incentive to over-estimate. Their incentives lie in being as accurate and reliable as possible. Exxon doesn't care about AGW, they want to know about the danger to their rigs. Agribusiness wants to know about the danger to their crops. Plenty of folks outside of MSM are looking at the predictions of meteorologists, have lots of money riding on them, and are certainly measuring and remembering how accurate those guys were. The media may have an incentive to play up extreme forecasts, but not the experts.

 

this


only the extremely partisan would assume that everyone else is partisan.
Weather forecasters who constantly and purposefully miss the mark for political purposes would soon find themselves without a job.