re: #320 spare o’lake

Believe it or not, I’m not an AGW denier but neither am I an AGW advocate…I’m just hoping we can catch a break from mother nature.

First the water freezes into thin ice. Then, if the trend continues and more thin ice forms, the thin ice eventually gets thicker. Does this not make sense?

Does anyone else find it odd that AGW advocates get hostile when challeged with even slightly anomalous facts?

We get hostile lies and misrepresentations of facts. We get hostile to cherry picking. We get hostile to pseudo-scientific babble masquerading as science in an attempt to cloud the science and frankly lie.

We get especially hostile to those who d this and then take on a mock affront as if they were “just presenting something legitimate counterpoints” and even dress that up in unearned phony scientific language like “anomalous” when there never was a counterpoint or legitimacy to the question in the first place.

We get hostile because we have to write the same things over and over and over to people who have seen the correct explanations many times. For example the entire ice are vs. ice volume thing has come up here at least a dozen times. There was even a whole thread dedicated to that point. We get hostile after typing out long anfd thoughtful explainations based on taking the time to find out the science (and some of us actually are scientists) providing link after link and fact after fact only to have it all ignored and repeat the process over and over with the same fools who repeat the same nonsense.

It is insulting. Read the damned science for once before opening your mouth. If you have a legitimate question, then ask it as one. Don’t post about some “inconvenient FACT” as if you have a “gotcha” when in reality you know as much about the topic as your cat.