"The people working on this "problem" aren't climatologists either, they're physicists, geologists, astronomers, meteorologists, paleo-climatologists." That was the last sentence of the third paragraph from post 823.

I'm not arguing with the smartest guy on the planet. I mean, what's the point?

And since I don't want to personally attack anyone, lemme say that I hope you aren't breeding either. Can't have too many people running about who are smarter than the experts.

In edit-It is not about a consensus amongst people. It is about the consensus amongst experts. That is the fine point that you seem to miss.

I wasn't questioning Stardock's conduct policy, nor was I hoping to debate it. I don't know how you got that from my post. I merely asked why my questioning someone's credibility is an issue when they make outrageous claims, but another can hope that someone not breed and yet that isn't viewed as debating a person not a topic.

I posed that question to understand the process. If my asking this puts me on the boot list, so be it.

I think some people are pissed we were not all forced to drink the kool-aid  

I rather enjoy being insulted.  It's the lack of validity that pisses me off.  That idiot over at skepticalscience.com(edit: insulted the wrong idiot blogger) extolled the virtues of Time of Observation Bias when people specifically pointed out that records have been altered in ways that directly contradict such claims.  He never actually argued the merits of the claims because they're inarguable.  You have smooth trending station data, with no sudden jumps at the offending points, that were then edited to have the oddly abrupt changes that they were supposedly looking to remove.

The caliber of the typical response in this thread has been of a similar vein.  Hell, the particular page I refer to has been brought up multiple times in this thread as if it were somehow proving a point.  They've been blathering on and on about how the models show the problem is immediate and we're all going to die if we don't stop letting cows fart in the next ten years.  If I say the models are off by several hundred percent on the magnitude in change over the last decade, and in the wrong direction to boot, I get inane responses about how I'm not a scientist and they know better than me.  The actual discrepancy between the models and current temperatures?  The models are accurate because the IPCC said so, pay no attention to reality!  Or maybe the odd "it's the Sun stupid!" like they haven't been claiming all along that solar variance is minor compared to the rate of increase cause by CO2.

The only way I'd ever complain about name calling is if someone were being really boring.  For instance, if you're going to call people fags all the time, change it up a little.  I have karma from suggesting cunt punting assfucker, Luckmann was a bad, bad man for that.

Rules of conduct on Stardock's sites [plural] have evolved under the management of Stardock's sites' administrators and staff.

Those that find they have exceeded the boundaries of a dozen or more years of evolved conduct limitations find themselves no longer here.

Frogboy tends to be more blunt....others offer reprieves.

Everyone eventually discovers the limits...by subtle reminder...if not simply common good manners...

The TOS.....

You agree to not use the Service to:
(a) upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, pornographic, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;
( b ) harm minors in any way;
(c) impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, a Stardock official, forum leader, guide, moderator or host, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity;
(d) upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that you do not have a right to transmit under any law or under contractual or fiduciary relationships (such as inside information, proprietary and confidential information learned or disclosed as part of employment relationships or under nondisclosure agreements);
(e) upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that infringes any patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights of any party;
(f) upload, post or otherwise transmit any material that contains software viruses or any other computer code, files or programs designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment;
(g) interfere with or disrupt the Service or servers or networks connected to the Service, or disobey any requirements, procedures, policies or regulations of networks connected to the Service;
(h) intentionally or unintentionally violate any applicable local, state, national or international law, including, but not limited to, regulations promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, any rules of any national or other securities exchange, including, without limitation, the New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ, and any regulations having the force of law;
(i) "stalk" or otherwise harass another;
(j) make malicious personal attacks, statements of libel, or other behavior deemed unacceptable by administrators.
(k) collect or store personal data about other users;
(l) promote or provide instructional information about illegal activities, promote physical harm or injury against any group or individual, or promote any act of cruelty to animals. This may include, but is not limited to, providing instructions on how to assemble bombs, grenades and other weapons, and creating "Crush" sites;
(m) send chain letters, junk mail, spam or any use of distribution lists to any person who has not given specific permission to be included in such a process.
(n) Interfere with another member's use and enjoyment of the Service or another entity's use and enjoyment of similar services.
(o) promote or advertise sexual or pornographic material or websites;

Yes, luckily the forums are starting to get more love from,the dev team so we'll get more moderator features.  

Right now we are lucky to have people like Jafo who is, literally, one of the most experienced community moderators in the industry.

Based on a careful analysis of the timing of his comments, Jafo is clearly a bot.  Stardock has done a marvelous job of creating his 'legend' and fleshing it out with lots of textual and graphical 'evidence' but no human can survive with zero sleep. Ever.

Thanks, Paul, for all those sleepless Aussie nights.

As shown before in this thread it's the weight of the atmosphere on Venus that causes the heat. 

Whistler opened 13 days earlier than expected this year. Another meaningless cherry pick example. Meanwhile, when you look at the actual longer term weather trends in nearby Vancouver, BC, you see warmer winters, increased rainfall, and decreased snowfall.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/climatesnapshot/2012/01/27/global-warming-vancouver-means-even-more-rain-january

I agree with Ekko_Tek here. Its like this:

In Hungary this year we had snow until the end of March, so I guess we are going to have so much snow from now on.

OR NOT. We are expected to have no snow cover in some decades during the winters, and year after year there is less and less snow, this year was just a strong positive anomaly.

Making examples of extremities and ignoring trends is not a constructive thing to do in an argument.