Online Now 3509

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2277
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3693
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

Sig bet for who wins the election

  • cuznchips28 said...

    or is it sad you fail to comprehend that global warming and the greenhouse effect defy the first two laws of thermal dynamics, the reading might be a tad advanced for you but when you choose to believe what the liberal media feeds I understand that's easier

    I have a phd in chemical engineering. The reading is not too advanced, it is simply a misrepresentation of what the greenhouse effect is.

    Scientific research is non partisan. Data is data and it isn't made up (except for some extreme cases which I can tell you about). Point is, it is not falsified across an entire field.

    Do you also think smart meters are causing headaches and genetically engineered food is doing you harm?

    c_woodson ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    or is it sad you fail to comprehend that global warming and the greenhouse effect defy the first two laws of thermal dynamics, the reading might be a tad advanced for you but when you choose to believe what the liberal media feeds I understand that's easier

    So this person believes that the atmosphere surrounding the Earth is appropriately replicated by using a mirror? This is pretty ridiculous. The fact is the laws of thermodynamics are not violated. Radiative energy from the sun is different than radiative energy from the Earth. Scientific experiments have shown that the Earth's atmosphere does not absorb short-wave radiation as well as thermal (or long-wave) radiation. The Sun emits short-wave while the Earth releases thermal radiation. The net effect of this is that if you take the Earth and the atmosphere as a system, more energy enters the atmosphere from the Sun than escapes the atmosphere from the Earth. This is actually pretty clear and has been proven in multiple experiments and reported in peer-reviewed journals.

    I don't get any science talking points from media; I go straight to the source and read peer-reviewed publications written by experts in the field actually conducting experiments. Perhaps you should do the same. If you would like some citations for anything I've written above, please let me know and I will be more than happy to provide them.

    This post was edited by CockAtLaw on 11/3/2012 at 4:29 PM

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw ●

  • CockAtLaw said...

    So this person believes that the atmosphere surrounding the Earth is appropriately replicated by using a mirror? This is pretty ridiculous. The fact is the laws of thermodynamics are not violated. Radiative energy from the sun is different than radiative energy from the Earth. Scientific experiments have shown that the Earth's atmosphere does not absorb short-wave radiation as well as thermal (or long-wave) radiation. The Sun emits short-wave while the Earth releases thermal radiation. The net effect of this is that if you take the Earth and the atmosphere as a system, more energy enters the atmosphere from the Sun than escapes the atmosphere from the Earth. This is actually pretty clear and has been proven in multiple experiments and reported in peer-reviewed journals.

    I don't get any science talking points from media; I go straight to the source and ready peer-reviewed publications written by experts in the field actually conducting experiments. Perhaps you should do the same. If you would like some citations for anything I've written above, please let me know and I will be more than happy to provide them.

    Guy puts up a random web page and acts like it is vetted science. How about some peer-reviewed journal articles? If his theory is true, no reason there wouldn't be a ton of articles in reputable journals. Hell, it would make the cover of Science or Nature (just like my work did 10 years ago).

    c_woodson ●

  • c_woodson said...

    Guy puts up a random web page and acts like it is vetted science. How about some peer-reviewed journal articles? If his theory is true, no reason there wouldn't be a ton of articles in reputable journals. Hell, it would make the cover of Science or Nature (just like my work did 10 years ago).

    My favorite is when deniers cite physicists and geologists who do nothing than comment on peer-reviewed publications. They don't actually conduct experiments and publish peer-reviewed articles, but by golly they're good enough for deniers. If I ever need heart surgery, I'll probably go to a dentist because all doctors are the same right? Neither are scientists.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw ●

  • c_woodson said...

    Guy puts up a random web page and acts like it is vetted science. How about some peer-reviewed journal articles? If his theory is true, no reason there wouldn't be a ton of articles in reputable journals. Hell, it would make the cover of Science or Nature (just like my work did 10 years ago).

    it's fact doesn't matter where it came from, roflmao claiming your some scientist you spend all your time on a message board. your just some dumb kid

    cuznchips28 ●

  • CockAtLaw said...

    My favorite is when deniers cite physicists and geologists who do nothing than comment on peer-reviewed publications. They don't actually conduct experiments and publish peer-reviewed articles, but by golly they're good enough for deniers. If I ever need heart surgery, I'll probably go to a dentist because all doctors are the same right? Neither are scientists.

    except the first two laws of thermal dynamics dispute those bogus experiments

    cuznchips28 ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    it's fact doesn't matter where it came from

    This tells any reasonable person all they need to know.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    except the first two laws of thermal dynamics dispute those bogus experiments

    I explained how the laws of thermodynamics are not violated. Please feel free to post a peer-reviewed article showing that anything I just said is wrong.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    your just some dumb kid

    irony

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw ●

  • CockAtLaw said...

    I explained how the laws of thermodynamics are not violated. Please feel free to post a peer-reviewed article showing that anything I just said is wrong.

    well actually that is what global warming and green houses gases are based on, but it's ok you can be a sheep like the rest

    cuznchips28 ●

  • CockAtLaw said...

    This tells any reasonable person all they need to know.

    yes because facts aren't facts based on the source, intelligent you are

    cuznchips28 ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    well actually that is what global warming and green houses gases are based on, but it's ok you can be a sheep like the rest

    You should read the attached. It's written and reviewed by climatologists who are actually conducting experiments.

    Unknown Titlke

    > endobj xref 133 20 0000000016 00000 n 0000001158 00000 n 0000000709 00000 n 0000001411 00000 n 0000001702 00000 n 0000002184 00000 n 0000002775 00000 n 0000003003 00000 n 0000003225 00000 n 0000003302 00000 n 0000003957 00000 n 0000004689 00000 n 0000005125 00000 n 0000005362 00000 n 0000006141 00000 n 0000006923 00000 n 0000007739 00000 n 0000008503 00000 n 0000009243 00000 n 0000000987 00000 n trailer

    www.eumetsat.int
    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    yes because facts aren't facts based on the source, intelligent you are

    If it's a scientific fact, it should be pretty simple to find a peer-reviewed article supporting your position. It shouldn't be difficult at all.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw ●

  • CockAtLaw said...

    If it's a scientific fact, it should be pretty simple to find a peer-reviewed article supporting your position. It shouldn't be difficult at all.

    I think the problem is he/she doesn't understand what peer-reviewed means.

    What do I know, I'm just some dumb kid.

    c_woodson ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    it's fact doesn't matter where it came from, roflmao claiming your some scientist you spend all your time on a message board. your just some dumb kid

    Yes, because scientists don't have hobbies.

    Send me your address and I'll autograph some of my journal articles and send them your way. Should be leisure reading for an astute science expert like yourself.

    c_woodson ●

  • cuznchips28 said...

    and it's laughable that people like you buy into the global warming hoax

    It's laughable that people like you think science is a "hoax"

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • BamaLivesFootba said...

    Occam's razor on AGW.

    You might find this useful

    attachment
    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • c_woodson said...

    Yes, because scientists don't have hobbies.

    Send me your address and I'll autograph some of my journal articles and send them your way. Should be leisure reading for an astute science expert like yourself.

    roflmao

    You might be my new favorite poster over here.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • I feel pretty good about my bet. I know people on both sides and internal polls are showing Romney winning. Other polls that you are using have a plus 5 to plus 12 dems over republicans. This would mean more dems show up this year than 2008. Just don't see that happening. Also, like another poster said, the rallies are 10 to 1 for Romney in terms of people who show up. Hell, Obama people had Stevie Wonder play a get out the vote party in Ohio and only 200 people showed up. I see a 300+ electoral college win for Romney. We will see though.

    BTW, I am up for a 3 month ban if obama wins instead of the sig bet. 3 month under 300 electoral votes. 6 months if 300 to 324. 1 year ban for 325 to 349 and 4 year ban if 350 and above for the winner in electoral college votes. Let me know who is up for this.

    signature image signature image

    I lost a sig bet. that is why I have these sigs until November 7, 2013.

    pcgamecock2001 ●

  • pcgamecock2001 said...

    I feel pretty good about my bet. I know people on both sides and internal polls are showing Romney winning. Other polls that you are using have a plus 5 to plus 12 dems over republicans. This would mean more dems show up this year than 2008. Just don't see that happening. Also, like another poster said, the rallies are 10 to 1 for Romney in terms of people who show up. Hell, Obama people had Stevie Wonder play a get out the vote party in Ohio and only 200 people showed up. I see a 300+ electoral college win for Romney. We will see though.

    BTW, I am up for a 3 month ban if obama wins instead of the sig bet. 3 month under 300 electoral votes. 6 months if 300 to 324. 1 year ban for 325 to 349 and 4 year ban if 350 and above for the winner in electoral college votes. Let me know who is up for this.

    Yes.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "A political call, the fall guy accord...We can't afford to be neutral on a moving train..."

    BamaLivesFootba ●

  • BLF,
    Yes you are in. Looking forward to Tuesday if so.

    signature image signature image

    I lost a sig bet. that is why I have these sigs until November 7, 2013.

    pcgamecock2001 ●

  • BTW, forgot to post this.

    Barone: Going out on a limb: Romney beats Obama, handily | WashingtonExaminer.com

    Fundamentals usually prevail in American elections. That's bad news for Barack Obama. True, Americans want to think well of their presidents and many think it would be bad if Americans were perceived as rejecting the first black president.

    washingtonexaminer.com
    signature image signature image

    I lost a sig bet. that is why I have these sigs until November 7, 2013.

    pcgamecock2001 ●

  • We still have our bet right?

    Hurricaniac1228 ●

  • I'm in for Obama for whatever the terms are.

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2 ●

  • I'll do a 3 month sig bet.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports