Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Kobe Bitch
Comments
-
-
Main bored belongs
-
I actually chinned one of the @TheKobeStopper poasts - but that was only because @Tequilla blocked him on the twitters
-
I think it’s odd that you said you were being sarcastic but you then spent the next few sentences arguing for the exact point that you were saying sarcastically.Tequilla said:
It’s called sarcasmTheKobeStopper said:I always find it amusing that you never hear anybody talk about global warming in times likes these
That’s you ^^^^
How did I misrepresent what you said?
When heat related events take place (notably hurricanes) ... everybody is really quick to point out the link between the event and temperature
Yet when really abnormal events swing the other way there’s never a recognition that things swing the other way as well
My point is that what bothers me most about climate change advocates is that they cherry pick events to their narrative ... it’s off putting
You want to show evidence that the effects of climate change results in greater volatility in weather ... I’m listening
You want to talk about observable data that we need to address ... I’m open to talking about how that is done
But I will always be critical of those that selectively use data to advance a pre-determined conclusion
You think cold weather disproves climate change.
You don’t understand the difference between weather and climate.
And the cold weather events to get addressed. Constantly.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcdfw.com/lx/you-can-thank-climate-change-for-extreme-weather-patterns-wreaking-havoc-in-texas-and-across-the-u-s/2553835/?amp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/cold-winter-global-warming-polar-vortex/a-56534450 -
It only became "climate change" when global warming didn't catch on.
-
You don’t understand the difference between weather and climate.
You need to see @IrishDawg22 again
And try to catch up. -
It's what his mommies told him.RaceBannon said:You don’t understand the difference between weather and climate.
You need to see @IrishDawg22 again
And try to catch up. -
Alternative facts don't care about your feelings.Tequilla said:If you’re going to try to come after me on Twitter ... get your fucking facts straight
Absolutely NOTHING that you accuse me of is even remotely close to accurate -
Again ... out of contextTheKobeStopper said:
I think it’s odd that you said you were being sarcastic but you then spent the next few sentences arguing for the exact point that you were saying sarcastically.Tequilla said:
It’s called sarcasmTheKobeStopper said:I always find it amusing that you never hear anybody talk about global warming in times likes these
That’s you ^^^^
How did I misrepresent what you said?
When heat related events take place (notably hurricanes) ... everybody is really quick to point out the link between the event and temperature
Yet when really abnormal events swing the other way there’s never a recognition that things swing the other way as well
My point is that what bothers me most about climate change advocates is that they cherry pick events to their narrative ... it’s off putting
You want to show evidence that the effects of climate change results in greater volatility in weather ... I’m listening
You want to talk about observable data that we need to address ... I’m open to talking about how that is done
But I will always be critical of those that selectively use data to advance a pre-determined conclusion
You think cold weather disproves climate change.
You don’t understand the difference between weather and climate.
And the cold weather events to get addressed. Constantly.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcdfw.com/lx/you-can-thank-climate-change-for-extreme-weather-patterns-wreaking-havoc-in-texas-and-across-the-u-s/2553835/?amp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/cold-winter-global-warming-polar-vortex/a-56534450
Everything about more volatile extremes in climate makes complete sense to me. I have never been one to not only embrace the direction of clean/green energy but recognize that there are elements of climate change that is definitely more controllable than what we’ve historically done.
Where I pause with caution is making sure that as we transition we make sure we don’t let things slip through the cracks and go “oops” after the fact ... which is what is happening in Texas
And let’s be clear, what’s happening in Texas looks and feels like gross negligence in terms of protecting infrastructure in case of these types of events.
The reason I say I’m being sarcastic is because I’m not seeing the same level of vigilance about claiming this vortex is indicative proof of global warming as when warm weather events happen. I suspect that that’s because it’s easier to draw connections to warning to warming events. The reality is people need to understand it goes both ways ... which was really my point (likely poorly made)
I think this is a good example of how if you want to actually have a conversation ... have one and engage. But if your path is to take something out of context and put someone out on blast, that’s just the wrong way to go about doing things. -
Didn't read but fuck it I chinned anyway.Tequilla said:
Again ... out of contextTheKobeStopper said:
I think it’s odd that you said you were being sarcastic but you then spent the next few sentences arguing for the exact point that you were saying sarcastically.Tequilla said:
It’s called sarcasmTheKobeStopper said:I always find it amusing that you never hear anybody talk about global warming in times likes these
That’s you ^^^^
How did I misrepresent what you said?
When heat related events take place (notably hurricanes) ... everybody is really quick to point out the link between the event and temperature
Yet when really abnormal events swing the other way there’s never a recognition that things swing the other way as well
My point is that what bothers me most about climate change advocates is that they cherry pick events to their narrative ... it’s off putting
You want to show evidence that the effects of climate change results in greater volatility in weather ... I’m listening
You want to talk about observable data that we need to address ... I’m open to talking about how that is done
But I will always be critical of those that selectively use data to advance a pre-determined conclusion
You think cold weather disproves climate change.
You don’t understand the difference between weather and climate.
And the cold weather events to get addressed. Constantly.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcdfw.com/lx/you-can-thank-climate-change-for-extreme-weather-patterns-wreaking-havoc-in-texas-and-across-the-u-s/2553835/?amp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/cold-winter-global-warming-polar-vortex/a-56534450
Everything about more volatile extremes in climate makes complete sense to me. I have never been one to not only embrace the direction of clean/green energy but recognize that there are elements of climate change that is definitely more controllable than what we’ve historically done.
Where I pause with caution is making sure that as we transition we make sure we don’t let things slip through the cracks and go “oops” after the fact ... which is what is happening in Texas
And let’s be clear, what’s happening in Texas looks and feels like gross negligence in terms of protecting infrastructure in case of these types of events.
The reason I say I’m being sarcastic is because I’m not seeing the same level of vigilance about claiming this vortex is indicative proof of global warming as when warm weather events happen. I suspect that that’s because it’s easier to draw connections to warning to warming events. The reality is people need to understand it goes both ways ... which was really my point (likely poorly made)
I think this is a good example of how if you want to actually have a conversation ... have one and engage. But if your path is to take something out of context and put someone out on blast, that’s just the wrong way to go about doing things.
