Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: "big fat ignorant liar"
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 13:21:59 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <207e4d65af314316f2686e6fe11f6c220d1711bb@i2pn2.org>
References: <YpG1Q.1572310$4AM6.1293015@fx17.ams4>
 <ab53329d43e0587e58fe949b7a8f1dce83bb580f@i2pn2.org>
 <1027uhs$r7bj$2@dont-email.me>
 <6f1855be769b3afc319d871c0d451f381803ba5e@i2pn2.org>
 <1029hvm$1ah2f$1@dont-email.me> <102bhn6$1t2a1$1@dont-email.me>
 <102c462$20jl4$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 17:49:06 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="85268"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <102c462$20jl4$10@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US

On 6/11/25 10:34 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/11/2025 4:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2025-06-10 15:11:50 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 6/10/2025 6:15 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/9/25 8:34 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/9/2025 7:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/9/25 3:16 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>> "big fat ignorant liar" -- Damon
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are no words.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you show me wrong?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or are you complaining about me telling him the truth?
>>>>>
>>>>> What about this paper that I wrote?
>>>>>
>>>>> Severe anthropogenic climate change proven entirely with verifiable 
>>>>> facts
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/ 
>>>>> publication/336568434_Severe_anthropogenic_climate_change_proven_entirely_with_verifiable_facts
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which just shows you don't know the meaning of the word "prove".
>>>
>>> What specifically do you believe is not proven?
>>
>> The article makes no attempt to prove anything. 
> 
> That is a dishonest or stupid thing to say.
> It proves that CO2 has increased 126-fold faster in
> 60 years than the next fastest time in the last 800,000
> years where it took 7,537 years to increase as much.

No, it doesn't "prove" that fact, it cites a source that says it.

> 
> Pieter Tans 2019 (lead scientist of NOAA's Global
> Greenhouse Gas Reference Network agrees
> 
> "There is no currently known climate science that
> could possibly attribute the current 100-foldfaster
> increase of global CO2 to any natural process that
> would have gone undetected." Pieter Tans 2019
> (lead scientist of NOAA's Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network

Which again, doesn't PROVE anything, but is just an appeal to athority,

Your problem is you don't know what it means to actually PROVE 
something, because you chose to not learn the basics of logic.


By your "logic", we can prove just about anything we want, we just need 
to find a source of some meaningful LOOKING data, and someone with a bit 
of credetials to make a claim.

Sorry, that just shows that you don't understand the nature of what it 
takes to PROVE something,

The Climate Change deniers can come up with much more "data" and 
"experts" that just counteract what you say, so if you claim you have 
"proved" it, so have they, amd thus you are showing that your idea of 
logic allows for the whole system to just be contradictory,

> 
> 
>> Most of it is about the
>> carbon dioxide concentration, which is usualy not regarded as an aspect
>> of climate. One diagram shows a clear but small chage of temperature
>> during 120 years.
>>
>> Promised in the title but not given are proofs of "anthropogenic"
>> and "severe".
>>
> 
>