Ok hold on now, Maybe we need to increase global warming! Winter Is Coming!

[Steeltime]

I practice litigation, and have done so for 26 years. I depose witnesses very regularly and have conducted thousands of depositions. Something I learned years ago was that if a witness simply refuses to answer a simple question, then the witness (1) in fact knows the answer, (2) realizes the answer hurts his position, and thereby (3) sticks to a scripted non-response.

That ***-clown's idiotic "97%" answer was a textbook example of that tactic, and one that Cruz recognized. In court, the judge would grant a motion to strike the testimony as non-responsive and tell the witness to answer the question.

In deposition - which occur far more frequently than trial - no judge is present. I have a tactic I use for bullshit artists like this guy - I tell the witness, "Look, I will clear my calendar for the rest of this week, and next week, and bring you back day after day if you want. But I will get an answer to my question."

Witnesses will eventually answer my questions, even where the answer kills them. But I can tell you from first-hand experience, based on hundreds if not thousands of examples, that this clown's non-answers prove that he ******* well knows that the answer hurts, and thereby offers some asinine non-response.

 

[Spike]

I liked how Cruz kept calling them "global warming alarmists"

ha ha

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I liked how the dude testifying had to look back to get guidance on the questions "Have you heard the phrase 'the Pause'?" and "Do you know what it means?" WTF. Why would you need to consult with someone on that?

Besides what Steeltime said, a lot of people who run organizations like this (my dad has dealt with a lot of them in his working life) are hired for their ability to raise money, not so much for their knowledge of the issue the organization represents. They all have specialists and Kool-Aid drinkers who do that. The President or CEO's job is to get money.

 

[Elfiero]

I liked how the dude testifying had to look back to get guidance on the questions "Have you heard the phrase 'the Pause'?" and "Do you know what it means?" WTF. Why would you need to consult with someone on that?

I don't know why the head of the Sierra club is being questioned on climate science in this video????

This is equvilant to me asking the president of the PGA tour to explain the metallurgy aspect of golf club manufacturing. I would expect him to say "trust me, the golf clubs work quite well".

That's without even bringing up the fact that Cruz's questions are based on nonsense; there is no "pause",and you don't look at climate data with 18 year or as in the case of a poster here 17 year baselines.

I myself could also take Cruz, put him in front of cameras, question him on climate change and make him look like the jackass he is in about 5 minutes.

Of course I would use the facts, something that Cruz has an aversion for, and not just when it comes to AGW.

 

[Superman]

you mean the facts that are presented to you that make you run off for days at a time when your lame house of cards argument crashes down? those facts?

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

I don't know why the head of the Sierra club is being questioned on climate science in this video????

You might try watching the whole video. Sen. Cruz explains why he was asked at the end.

SMH.

 

[Superman]

C U Next Tuesday, Eflie!

 

[Elfiero]

you mean the facts that are presented to you that make you run off for days at a time when your lame house of cards argument crashes down? those facts?

Yeah that must be it "I run off"

Why don't you look at this thread

http://steelernation.com/showthread.php?5112-But-if-we-cut-emmisions-the-Chinese-won-t-but/page5

so you can see what running away looks like? I explain to steel time why he's wrong when it comes to the application of hadcrut data and his answer on the next page is basically LA LA LA LA LA (with fingers in ears).

He ignores his "house of cards" knowing you clowns will as well while you all return to jerking each other off because "you showed that libtard"..... Lol.....the mental disorder that is CONservatism.

 

[Spike]

Climate Computer models are junk


An Australian scientist has made some discoveries that will completely undermine the models that the Global Warming theory depends on.

From Perth Now:

A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.

A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.

He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.

He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.

It turns out the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.

“Yes, CO2 has an effect, but it’s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades”.

Now what this means is that all the whining about the apocalypse coming that will kill everyone is just a big hoax and exaggeration.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/opi...e/news-story/d1fe0f22a737e8d67e75a5014d0519c6

 

[Steeltime]

Yeah that must be it "I run off"

Why don't you look at this thread

http://steelernation.com/showthread.php?5112-But-if-we-cut-emmisions-the-Chinese-won-t-but/page5

so you can see what running away looks like? I explain to steel time why he's wrong when it comes to the application of hadcrut data and his answer on the next page is basically LA LA LA LA LA (with fingers in ears).

He ignores his "house of cards" knowing you clowns will as well while you all return to jerking each other off because "you showed that libtard"..... Lol.....the mental disorder that is CONservatism.

The response is here, you ******* moron:

http://steelernation.com/showthread.php?5112-But-if-we-cut-emmisions-the-Chinese-won-t-but/page3

 

[Steeltime]

Climate Computer models are junk. It turns out the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.

“Yes, CO2 has an effect, but it’s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades”.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/opi...e/news-story/d1fe0f22a737e8d67e75a5014d0519c6

Cue elfiePolo to tell us that climate models are not predictive, but that we need to drastically reduce petroleum energy usage because the climate models predict substantial temperature increases without such reductions.

 

[Spike]

97% of climate scientists say Lalalalalalala, I can't hear you...there is no debate.

 

[Spike]

The 97% hoax is from the Doran & Zimmerman “study” in 2008.

10,257 scientist were sent an online survey with only 2 questions.

Only 3,146 responded.

Nearly 20% of those said man had NO significant influence on global temperatures.

They reduced the original list of over 10,000 participants down to 79 self-described “Climate scientists”.

77 of the 79 said the earth was warming, hence the 97%.

 

[Superman]

Cue elfiePolo to tell us that climate models are not predictive, but that we need to drastically reduce petroleum energy usage because the climate models predict substantial temperature increases without such reductions.

and it's not that the models are wrong, but the degree in which they are wrong.
or something like that.

 

[Steeltime]

and it's not that the models are wrong, but the degree in which they are wrong.
or something like that.

Exactly. The models are not supposed to project future temperatures but we need to change our way of life and energy usage because the models project significant temperature increases if we keep using so much petroleum.

 

[Superman]

Exactly. The models are not supposed to project future temperatures but we need to change our way of life and energy usage because the models project significant temperature increases if we keep using so much petroleum.

well, yeah, look what happened to Mars!

 

[Ron Burgundy]

and it's not that the models are wrong, but the degree in which they are wrong.
or something like that.

We knew a while ago that if you plugged yesteryear's temperatures into the models that they didn't come close to predicting today's temperatures.

well, yeah, look what happened to Mars!

Friggin' Martians and their SUV's.

 

[Elfiero]

You might try watching the whole video. Sen. Cruz explains why he was asked at the end.

SMH.

Yeah I didn't watch it through the first time since Cruz was stuck on pauses and incorrect representations. I watched it all now and heard nothing but his claims of objective truth,and data being data at the end.

He doesn't know what he's looking at( I doubt he even looked at it) and he doesn't understand how the hadcrut data is used nor its shortcomings, like I said ;nonsense coming from a jackass.

He strikes me as a slightly more intelligent (which isn't saying much)male version of Palin, but every bit as slimy.

Its not that hard to prove he's a jackass .Like I said earlier not just concerning AGW either.

 

[Steeltime]

Yeah I didn't watch it through the first time

No ****, Sherlock. So you commented on a video YOU DID NOT WATCH.

He doesn't know what he's looking at( I doubt he even looked at it)

Who cares if he looked at the data, fuckwipe? You comment on a video you ADMIT YOU DID NOT ******* WATCH.

He strikes me as a slightly more intelligent (which isn't saying much)male version of Palin.

The liberal go-to: **** the data and argue a conservative is dumb. Here are the data regarding "stooooopid" Cruz:

Ted Cruz graduated with honors from Princeton University and with high honors from Harvard Law School. He served as a law clerk to Chief Justice William Rehnquist on the U.S. Supreme Court.

So did you graduate with honors from Princeton, elfiePolo - the same fuckwad who lied about her alternative names on this site? Did you graduate with high honors from Harvard Law School, fucknut??

Here is what Professor Alan Dershowitz had to say about Cruz:

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas): "Off-the-charts brilliant. And you know, liberals make the terrible mistake, including some of my friends and colleagues, of thinking that all conservatives are dumb. And I think one of the reasons that conservatives have been beating liberals in the courts and in public debates is because we underestimate them. Never underestimate Ted Cruz. He is off-the-chart brilliant.

http://www.philly.com/philly/column...__Dershowitz_and_his_life_at_Harvard_Law.html

Cruz's academic background is more impressive than Bammy, who attended a middling school (Occidental), and transferred to a lower-tier Ivy League school (Columbia).

So Princeton, Harvard Law, and Alan Dershowitz agree ... you are a moron in claiming that Ted Cruz is anything other than one of the smartest people in the country.

Its not that hard to prove he's a jackass .

And there you go ... Cruz is brilliant, experienced, a successful attorney who argued 9 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and who destroys leftists who waddle before the Senate to testify and expect asinine, idiotic, canned non-responses to satisfy the Senator from Texas.

In summation ... elfiePolo? Stupid lying ****.

Ted Cruz? Brilliant Ivy League graduate whom elfiePolo secretly admires, and publicly excoriates.

 

[Elfiero]

No ****, Sherlock. So you commented on a video YOU DID NOT WATCH.



Who cares if he looked at the data, fuckwipe? You comment on a video you ADMIT YOU DID NOT ******* WATCH.



The liberal go-to: **** the data and argue a conservative is dumb. Here are the data regarding "stooooopid" Cruz:

Ted Cruz graduated with honors from Princeton University and with high honors from Harvard Law School. He served as a law clerk to Chief Justice William Rehnquist on the U.S. Supreme Court.

So did you graduate with honors from Princeton, elfiePolo - the same fuckwad who lied about her alternative names on this site? Did you graduate with high honors from Harvard Law School, fucknut??

Here is what Professor Alan Dershowitz had to say about Cruz:

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas): "Off-the-charts brilliant. And you know, liberals make the terrible mistake, including some of my friends and colleagues, of thinking that all conservatives are dumb. And I think one of the reasons that conservatives have been beating liberals in the courts and in public debates is because we underestimate them. Never underestimate Ted Cruz. He is off-the-chart brilliant.

http://www.philly.com/philly/column...__Dershowitz_and_his_life_at_Harvard_Law.html

Cruz's academic background is more impressive than Bammy, who attended a middling school (Occidental), and transferred to a lower-tier Ivy League school (Columbia).

So Princeton, Harvard Law, and Alan Dershowitz agree ... you are a moron in claiming that Ted Cruz is anything other than one of the smartest people in the country.



And there you go ... Cruz is brilliant, experienced, a successful attorney who argued 9 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and who destroys leftists who waddle before the Senate to testify and expect asinine, idiotic, canned non-responses to satisfy the Senator from Texas.

In summation ... elfiePolo? Stupid lying ****.

Ted Cruz? Brilliant Ivy League graduate whom elfiePolo secretly admires, and publicly excoriates.

Nice Ad Hominem overall , and nice touch with the straw man at the end too.....Elfie admirer of Felito Cruz....lol...steel time an ambulance chaser who uses the term "fucknut"....

You can be Felito's fan club president for all I care, I know what he's about. Like I said, slimy.

The good news is he'll take his campaign money, write a few books telling us how he would have clobbered those libs if he had become potus, then disappear.

Felito while bright, is a person almost no one liked in college. Smug, arrogant, and inflexible.A good debater but from what I've read his inflexibility is what made him lose to the top debaters in the country quite often.

Here is what another one of his professors had to say about him:

Edward Bergman, a New Jersey lawyer who taught Cruz in a course on alternative dispute resolution, says Cruz's classroom manner and written work displayed a smugness that made him unpopular.

In the course, Cruz wrote a final paper concluding that alternatives meant to ease the glut of court cases nationwide are "obstacles to the people's rights" to trial and due process.

"There he is, in a nutshell," Bergman says. "He was somebody who gave the impression that very complex issues are really not*so complex, and he can tell you the superior, correct view. It's a smug, know-it-all attitude about the world.

So you see while you may accuse me of being another poster, being a woman,( all part of your paranoid conspiracies including AGW being a hoax)

You are a sychopant of a guy who really did change his name(to something more Anglo of course) Felito/Ted, and of a guy so brilliant...so brilliant........

That a " libtard" like Chris Mathews handed his *** to him in that video,....and with that I rest my case counselor.

 

[Steeltime]

He doesn't know what he's looking at ... He strikes me as a slightly more intelligent (which isn't saying much)male version of Palin

Felito while bright, is a person almost no one liked in college. Smug, arrogant, and inflexible.A good debater but from what I've read his inflexibility is what made him lose to the top debaters in the country quite often.

You contradict yourself in the space of two comments made 24 hours apart, idiot.

Further, your comment that Cruz supposedly lacked skills as a college debater is another elfiePolo lie:

Moreover, you clearly have no clue how debate competitions work if you claim that Cruz's "inflexibility" made him unsuccessful in debates. The way the debates work, those in competition do not know which side of the debate the person was to have before the debate begins. Another elfiePolo lie.

Further, this particular debate arose when you stated that Ted Cruz is dumb. You said that, buttlick, not me. I cited facts showing that you are a lying, ignorant slut. Once again, the undeniable fact is that Cruz graduated with honors from Princeton and high honors from Harvard Law School. I have substantial reason to say that Cruz is one of the most intelligent people on earth.

Seeing that your flaccid attempt to impugn Cruz's intellect fails, you then change the subject and blather about Cruz's personality. First, the "ooooh, he is so mean" commentary is completely irrelevant to your false claim that Cruz is stupid. You probably don't understand that because you are in fact too dumb to follow the arguments, even those you raise. Second, you have no basis for commenting on Cruz's personality.

Also, you are still denying adopting the user name "PoloMalu43" last year, despite the fact that elfie disappeared at the same time Polo43 appeared, Polo43 had exactly the same political and environmental views as elfie, Polo43 had the same writing style as elfie, and lo and behold, once elfie returns, Polo43 disappears.

Yeah, one need not have graduated with honors from Princeton to know that you are elfie/Polo43, and a liar.

Finally, you like playing pretend lawyer. But as expected, when make-believe encounters the real thing, the fake gets destroyed. So why don't you tell us again that Cruz is dumb, fake-counselor-wanna-be?

 

[ark steel]

If i send out 10k surveys and only 3k come back, I would assume that 70% of the people didn't agree with me enough to answer two questions.

 

[Confluence]

If i send out 10k surveys and only 3k come back, I would assume that 70% of the people didn't agree with me enough to answer two questions.

Or, it was just dumbassery and they tossed it. So the takeaway should have been:
"Given a silly, poorly worded survey of only two questions, 70% of those on the fishing list were intelligent enough to ignore it."

 

[Spike]

It's time to abolish the EPA



Another setback for Obama: Court halts EPA’s controversial water rule

A federal appeals court on Friday dealt the Obama administration’s environmental agenda a major blow, halting a highly controversial water rule and saying more time is needed to determine whether the regulations are legal.

Critics had said the rule would give the Environmental Protection Agency control over irrigation ditches, canals and small streams, giving the federal government a say in permitting and land-use decisions over millions of acres of land surrounding those waters.

A lower court had already blocked the rule in 13 states, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit issued a nationwide stay, undercutting the EPA’s push to try to carry out the rule in the rest of the country.

In a 2-1 decision, the majority said the process the EPA used to write the new rules was “facially suspect” because the agency didn’t tell the public never asked the public for comments on the far-reaching limits it ended up imposing.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/9/court-halts-epas-water-rule/?page=all#pagebreak

 

[Ron Burgundy]

It's time to abolish the EPA

Each state already has their own environmental department.