The Weather, etcetera

[mellie]

By all means, don't let me hold you back.

[Pastafarian]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence apparently, so before I disprove your statement, you need to be able to prove its right.

[mellie]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence apparently, so before I disprove your statement, you need to be able to prove its right.

Whats so extraordinary about denoting to or enquiring about a commonly observed weather-related phenomena, eg, the temperature increasing when it rains?

No need to make it appear more difficult , complex than it has to be Pasta, surely a man of your scientific gravitas has his own 'informal' theories concerning this rather 'basic' weather- related phenomena, given a few of us here (as uneducated as you claim we be) at least had the balls to offer ours.

Or perhaps you are just too learned for this forum Pasta, this and prefer to antagonise, criticise the 'lesser' offerings than actively partake in lively debate/discussion yourself?

If so, it's my experience that those who do this on forums know the least of all.

[Pastafarian]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence apparently, so before I disprove your statement, you need to be able to prove its right.

Whats so extraordinary about denoting to or enquiring about a commonly observed weather-related phenomena, eg, the temperature increasing when it rains?

No need to make it appear more difficult , complex than it has to be Pasta, surely a man of your scientific gravitas has his own 'informal' theories concerning this rather 'basic' weather- related phenomena, given a few of us here (as uneducated as you claim we be) at least had the balls to offer ours.

Or perhaps you are just too learned for this forum Pasta, this and prefer to antagonise, criticise the 'lesser' offerings than actively partake in lively debate, discussion yourself?

If so, it's my experience that those who do this on forums know the least of all.

I'm not rteferring to that I'm referring to the Climatology=Lysenkoism bullshit statement.

[mellie]

Why are you deviating from the original question, (re precipitation and temperature change) preferring to discuss climatology, when by your own admission you are not a climatologist.

Or is it you fancy yourself as one, this and don't mind defending this fraud (not hard) science hence you took offence to my musing climatology is Lysenkoism.

Cherry picking are we?

[Pastafarian]

Why are you deviating from the original question, (re precipitation and temperature change) preferring to discuss climatology, when by your own admission you are not a climatologist.

Or is it you fancy yourself as one, this and don't mind defending this fraud (not hard) science hence you took offence to my musing climatology is Lysenkoism.

Cherry picking are we?

Not overly, just asking for some evidence thats its a fraud science and the Lysenkoism comment. The problem is essentially is that by making these types of statements you've essentially shown bias in regards to climatology. So its impossible to fully address your concerns, because you're displaying confirmation bias.

[mellie]

Why are you deviating from the original question, (re precipitation and temperature change) preferring to discuss climatology, when by your own admission you are not a climatologist.

Or is it you fancy yourself as one, this and don't mind defending this fraud (not hard) science hence you took offence to my musing climatology is Lysenkoism.

Cherry picking are we?

Not overly, just asking for some evidence thats its a fraud science and the Lysenkoism comment. The problem is essentially is that by making these types of statements you've essentially shown bias in regards to climatology. So its impossible to fully address your concerns, because you're displaying confirmation bias.

Oh you mean like 'Denialism'


I simply put forth my opinion, it's now up to you to either agree or disagree or at least contribute to the discussion in some way, though given you have no intentions of doing either,(preferring to nit-pick and correct typos) it's clear your only intention is to disrupt the flow of 'casual' conversation on this rather benign little thread.

Now to conclude ...

Could it be that you are simply a forum troll who has nothing better to do with their time than cause mischief on other peoples forums Pasta, this and have no real interest in science at all?

[Pastafarian]

Why are you deviating from the original question, (re precipitation and temperature change) preferring to discuss climatology, when by your own admission you are not a climatologist.

Or is it you fancy yourself as one, this and don't mind defending this fraud (not hard) science hence you took offence to my musing climatology is Lysenkoism.

Cherry picking are we?

Not overly, just asking for some evidence thats its a fraud science and the Lysenkoism comment. The problem is essentially is that by making these types of statements you've essentially shown bias in regards to climatology. So its impossible to fully address your concerns, because you're displaying confirmation bias.

Oh you mean like 'Denialism'


I simply put forth my opinion, it's now up to you to either agree or disagree or at least contribute to the discussion in some way, though given you have no intentions of doing either,(preferring to nit-pick and correct typos) it's clear your only intention is to disrupt the flow of 'casual' conversation on this rather benign little thread.

Now to conclude ...

Could it be that you are simply a forum troll who has nothing better to do with their time than cause mischief on other peoples forums Pasta, this and have no real interest in science at all?

Problem is I havent seen any science. Why not a reference or two?

[Pastafarian]

But if you really want to know its all about relative humidity and evaporation caused by rain

[mellie]

By your own admission, you are not a 'climatologist', so how is it you would be capable of interpreting the data, information I give you on the basis of your own bias towards this sham science?

Now, I have made the statement, it's now up to you to shoot holes in my argument, if you can.