Maybe I should ammend it to say large majority.  But hey macsak you can find that one dude believing in unicorns, bigfoot, etc.  Just cause "all data" excludes the few wackjobs doesn't mean its an incorrect statement. I'm personally comfortable hat if 90% of scientists say something is correct and show proof that corroborates to that statement.  I would consider that correct.  Even if there is a minority that disagree.

the 90% number has been disproven many different ways...

Maybe I should ammend it to say large majority.  But hey macsak you can find that one dude believing in unicorns, bigfoot, etc.  Just cause "all data" excludes the few wackjobs doesn't mean its an incorrect statement. I'm personally comfortable hat if 90% of scientists say something is correct and show proof that corroborates to that statement.  I would consider that correct.  Even if there is a minority that disagree.

It's painfully obvious nothing we've tried to teach him has been accepted.  He prefers a statistical sampling of "scientists" who rely on government for funding over actual science.

I'm not arguing with a wall. 

Over and out.

the 90% number has been disproven many different ways...
[/quote

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-advanced.htm

Quote from: macsak on March 22, 2017, 12:58:54 PM

the 90% number has been disproven many different ways...

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-advanced.htm

Okay, let's ratchet up the rhetoric here:

http://www.anonews.co/nk-kill-americans/

Who are we to argue? 

Okay, let's ratchet up the rhetoric here:

http://www.anonews.co/nk-kill-americans/

Who are we to argue? 

Yeah....no....the size of the nukes wouldn't have that large of an EMP affect. IF by some miracle NK can detonate them in the right altitude and timing.

And you know this how? The same way you know 97% of all non climate scientists agree that man controls the climate? 

Maybe I shouldn't have asked?

Even you cant argue against the predicted size of their nukes.  Which is like 10kt max right now.  Which is tiny tiny tiny.  You also seen their many, many failed tests and pathetic missile tests.  Their failed satellites etc.  And after seeing all of this you think they can somehow magic new technology out of thin air?

Even you cant argue against the predicted size of their nukes.

And after seeing all of this you think they can somehow magic new technology out of thin air?

I don't think the death toll will be that bad,  but getting rid of mainland
Democrats, would really improve my life.  Getting rid of Honolulu
Democrats would really improve Hawaii.  What is the downside?

Don't be a horses ass, dude. Don't even try to tell me what I can or can't do. This statement is nothing but inflammatory, arrogant and elitist. It also shows you progressive roots and ignorance.
Dude, you are delusional. I never said anything like this at all. You are making this up and trying to put words into my mouth and incite an argument. Just go back into your little make believe world and play with your make believe, lower intelligence invisible people.

The worst part of this is you never even answered my question. I didn't ask you for an argument, I asked you to qualify yourself.I want to know what makes you the expert on NK and their capabilities. I am sorry I asked.

You can't buy any of my guns. . .    Hold on, maybe I shouldn't be hasty.  It would depend on how much you are offering. . . 

There seem to be many here who are seemingly omnipotent, particularly cornering the market on knowledge of weapon capabilities of foreign countries/groups as well as climate expertise.  I am no expert on NK or their capabilities, but I do know better than to try to argue what can't be proven to those who either 1) get all of their information from internet think tanks, or 2) argue based on beliefs as opposed to facts.