greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 18
th, 2012 at 9:28pm:
Everybody in the world knows what an AGW alarmist is, except you.
Absolutely amazing!
Let me explain it to you my uneducated, brainwashed little friend.x
An AGW alarmist is someone who subscribes to the AGW hypothesis and makes it their mission in life to spread fear among the community.
So an "alarmist" is someone who believes that the AGW hypothesis is "scientific truth"?
That would include virtually everyone on the planet except for you, Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt.
OK - I guess I, and pretty much everyone else except for you is an "alarmist".
greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 18
th, 2012 at 9:28pm:
i.e. they believe that the AGW hypothesis is "scientific truth" (LOL) and that if humans don't act now we are all doomed.
Really Greggery?
I think you are telling lies now, aren't you.
greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 18
th, 2012 at 9:28pm:
Considering you know next to nothing about climate and weather, I'm not surprised that you don't know what an AGW alarmist is.
Greggery - I think it is pretty clear that I know far more about climate and weather than you do.
You are not convincing anyone I'm afraid, when you run away like a little girl from every question you are asked. Why can't you answer questions Greggery?
greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 18
th, 2012 at 9:28pm:
Your ignorance knows no bounds, so it seems.
At least I can answer questions that are asked of me Greggery.
Why can't you?
Let me ask for the 8th time:
Perhaps you might like to explain to us why you think that measuring the C12/C13 ratio of atmospheric carbon is not a credible way of determining how much atmospheric cO2 is anthropogenic in origin? You asked for evidence about a particular point - (http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1352071339/75) - you were shown it - and now you just run away when asjked to explain why you think it is not "credible"
greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 18
th, 2012 at 9:28pm:
Back to school for you bunny boy. Off you hop.
Answer the question Greggery.