• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 16:38
CEST 22:38
KST 05:38
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202560RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings What tournaments are world championships? #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time The StarCraft 2 GOAT - An in-depth analysis Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion Dewalt's Show Matches in China
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? [G] Mineral Boosting Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food!
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 774 users

climatologist mann cleared of misconduct charges - Page 7

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 5 6 7 8 9 Next All
Gregsen
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Germany667 Posts
July 06 2010 01:33 GMT
#121


I can recommend this, too.
Boycott Activision whenever, wherever you can.
Gregsen
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Germany667 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 01:39:24
July 06 2010 01:34 GMT
#122
On July 06 2010 10:31 MadVillain wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 06 2010 10:06 .zch wrote:
Gregsen--
Because, again, I am glad you do your homework, as it were, I respected that you had a claim that CO2 and CH4 have been constant in the last 8000 years, as PROVEN by the Max Planck Institute. So, always on the search for new information, I took your advice and looked it up. Here's a direct quote:

Max-Planck-Institute for Biogeochemistry
CO2 is the single most important human-emitted greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, contributing 63.5 % (*) to the overall global radiative forcing. However, it is responsible for 85% of the increase in radiative forcing over the past decade and 86% over the last five years. For about 10,000 years before the industrial revolution, the atmospheric abundance of CO2 was nearly constant at ~ 280ppm (ppm = number of molecules of the gas per million molecules of dry air).
...
Since 1750, atmospheric CO2 has increased by 38%, primarily because of emissions from combustion of fossil fuels (8.62 Gt carbon in 2007) and deforestation and land use change (0.5-2.5 Gt carbon per year over the 2000-2005 time period). High-precision measurements of atmospheric CO2 beginning in 1958 show that the average increase of CO2 in the atmosphere corresponds to ~ 55% of the CO2 emitted by fossil fuel combustion.


So, thanks for the heads-up on the research. I appreciate your honesty, but, as I suspected, your reading comprehension wasn't quite on point. Anyone can find this document and read it from http://www.bgc.mpg.de/service/iso_gas_lab/IAEA-WMO2009/index.shtml , which is again a Max-Planck-Institute webpage; about halfway down the page it directs you to this document from which I took the quote: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/gaw/ghg/ghg5-online.html . The second link is the report from the World Meteorological Organization who sponsored a meeting at the MPI as a collection of greenhouse gas experts. They might have the evidence you are looking for...

Also, please don't use "OH ITS A THEORY LOL" argument. Unless you don't believe in evolution or gravity, you don't have to put that smug little winky-face after emphasizing the word "theory."


Bhaha get owned Gregsen.

It is obvious from your posts that you don't understand basic scientific principals. Humans release of billions upon billions of tons of CO2 (as well as other greenhouse gases, CO2 is luckily less potent then methan or nitrous oxide for example) has had an obvious measurable effect on global temperatures. This HAS been 'proven' (i don't use the word proven without quotes because in science you can't really prove something 100% only disprove of it) through 1000s of peer reviewed papers. I don't know what else I can tell you but that the research has been done and it all points unequivocally towards human made global warming.

Now you claim we should spend more time on 'saving animals from extinction', but do you realize that global warming is going to cause more animals to go extinct than anything humans have done before?

With the cause for global warming well established, its obvious that renewable energy technologies are the answer to the problem. If you're so uneducated about a subject don't try to talk about it.




dude, just shut up, read my last arguments, and understand that zch is referring to a DIFFERENT source. Seriously, how old are you?

Also, understand that, much more likely than being the end of the world, global warming has a positive effect on our environment. Maybe that helps you, as global warming is something you can't stop anyway.
Boycott Activision whenever, wherever you can.
MadVillain
Profile Joined June 2010
United States402 Posts
July 06 2010 01:39 GMT
#123
The 'interests' of the IPCC? What exactly are the 'interests' of the IPCC? This leads me to believe that you are buying into some sort of conspiracy theroy, and people who believe that sort of unsubstantiated garbage tend to ignore logic, and the simple fact of the matter.

While you link a youtube video I link this: http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/index.htm

For The Swarm!
Gregsen
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Germany667 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 01:44:31
July 06 2010 01:43 GMT
#124
On July 06 2010 10:39 MadVillain wrote:
The 'interests' of the IPCC? What exactly are the 'interests' of the IPCC? This leads me to believe that you are buying into some sort of conspiracy theroy, and people who believe that sort of unsubstantiated garbage tend to ignore logic, and the simple fact of the matter.

While you link a youtube video I link this: http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/index.htm




hahaha wow, while I link to a youtube video, you're linking to a complete assessment report on IPCC's own homepage. You're cool buddy, you're cool. And so objective.

How about you watch it first before saying that it completly denies logic? That'd be very kind.
Boycott Activision whenever, wherever you can.
MadVillain
Profile Joined June 2010
United States402 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 01:54:38
July 06 2010 01:52 GMT
#125
What exactly is there to be objective about? I'm posting the facts, and a compilation of the work thats been done on this subject matter. Its much more relevant and direct and can answer many of the questions that your ignorance is begging you to answer.

And please, how can you completely discredit one Max Planck Institute just because you believe its serving someone's interests, yet use another to 'disprove' global warming?

With that said the description from your youtube video:

"This film by the documentary-maker Martin Durkin presents the arguments of scientists and commentators who don't believe that CO2 produced by human activity is the main cause of climate change. It's all to scare the shit out of us folks! The Illuminati set this up to make us, the people of the world, the problem. Don't believe it! Resist the New World Order!!!!"

lol ok, the illuminati wtf?
For The Swarm!
Gregsen
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Germany667 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 01:57:01
July 06 2010 01:54 GMT
#126
I have no idea who put in this ridiculous description. It wasn't me at least.

I recommend you to watch it though, as it is way more direct and clear than all of the sources you've posted..or at least part 3 of 9.
Boycott Activision whenever, wherever you can.
Gregsen
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Germany667 Posts
July 06 2010 02:00 GMT
#127
to be more direct:
Boycott Activision whenever, wherever you can.
Romantic
Profile Joined January 2010
United States1844 Posts
July 06 2010 02:11 GMT
#128
LMAO Gregsen literally got his arguments from a bad documentary on Youtube.

Gregsen
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Germany667 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 02:18:36
July 06 2010 02:17 GMT
#129
On July 06 2010 11:11 Romantic wrote:
LMAO Gregsen literally got his arguments from a bad documentary on Youtube.




You are so right. I didn't read anything about this topic, not a single study from IPCC and the Max Planck Institute Hamburg, and didn't talk to a lot of meteorologists concerning that matter. I am also very bad at things like physics and biology.I didn't post this video so everybody could get at least a little bit of a different perspective rather than the totally one-sided media, no, it was my only source.

Also, how is this documentary bad?

Guess I'm outta here, since I made every point I was trying to make, and no point got neglected by evidence so far.
Boycott Activision whenever, wherever you can.
Romantic
Profile Joined January 2010
United States1844 Posts
July 06 2010 02:20 GMT
#130
Bye Gregson! Have a nice day!
Gregsen
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Germany667 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 02:22:39
July 06 2010 02:20 GMT
#131
On July 06 2010 11:20 Romantic wrote:
Bye Gregson! Have a nice day!



you too buddy, no hard feelings

btw: 40 years ago, we were afraid of global cooling! Oh, my bad, I got this information from my father, guess that doesn't count.
Boycott Activision whenever, wherever you can.
rredtooth
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
5459 Posts
July 06 2010 02:28 GMT
#132
the first few pages of this thread was so gold. hahahaha.
[formerly sponsored by the artist formerly known as Gene]
sluggaslamoo
Profile Blog Joined November 2009
Australia4494 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 02:47:15
July 06 2010 02:34 GMT
#133

Show nested quote +
On July 06 2010 10:06 .zch wrote:
Gregsen--
Because, again, I am glad you do your homework, as it were, I respected that you had a claim that CO2 and CH4 have been constant in the last 8000 years, as PROVEN by the Max Planck Institute. So, always on the search for new information, I took your advice and looked it up. Here's a direct quote:

Max-Planck-Institute for Biogeochemistry
CO2 is the single most important human-emitted greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, contributing 63.5 % (*) to the overall global radiative forcing. However, it is responsible for 85% of the increase in radiative forcing over the past decade and 86% over the last five years. For about 10,000 years before the industrial revolution, the atmospheric abundance of CO2 was nearly constant at ~ 280ppm (ppm = number of molecules of the gas per million molecules of dry air).
...
Since 1750, atmospheric CO2 has increased by 38%, primarily because of emissions from combustion of fossil fuels (8.62 Gt carbon in 2007) and deforestation and land use change (0.5-2.5 Gt carbon per year over the 2000-2005 time period). High-precision measurements of atmospheric CO2 beginning in 1958 show that the average increase of CO2 in the atmosphere corresponds to ~ 55% of the CO2 emitted by fossil fuel combustion.


So, thanks for the heads-up on the research. I appreciate your honesty, but, as I suspected, your reading comprehension wasn't quite on point. Anyone can find this document and read it from http://www.bgc.mpg.de/service/iso_gas_lab/IAEA-WMO2009/index.shtml , which is again a Max-Planck-Institute webpage; about halfway down the page it directs you to this document from which I took the quote: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/arep/gaw/ghg/ghg5-online.html . The second link is the report from the World Meteorological Organization who sponsored a meeting at the MPI as a collection of greenhouse gas experts. They might have the evidence you are looking for...

Also, please don't use "OH ITS A THEORY LOL" argument. Unless you don't believe in evolution or gravity, you don't have to put that smug little winky-face after emphasizing the word "theory."


On July 06 2010 10:24 Gregsen wrote:
Zch, this is not the source I referred to. Your link is guiding to the Max Planck Institute in Jena, I am referring to the Max Planck Institute in Hamburg. Those are two entirely different Institutes, difference being that the Institute in Hamburg isn't serving the interests of IPCC. There are a lot of Max-Planck-Institutes in Germany (insert smug little winky-face here).

Are you aware that there has been a medieval warming period between 800 and 1450, warmer than the one we are facing today, followed by a "mini iceage" with temperatures below average between 1450 and 1850? This is where all the graphs are starting, and as you can see, there's a good reason for it.

you really need to keep on searching for new information.



Gregson you mean the report from the Max Planck Institute Hamburg which says

"According to the calculations of scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, over the next century the climate will change more quickly than it ever has in the recent history of the earth. These results come from the latest climate model calculations from the German High Performance Computing Centre for Climate and Earth System Research.

The global temperature could rise by up to four degrees by the end of the century. Because of this warming, the sea level could rise on average by as many as 30 centimeters.

In addition to the findings about the complex interplay between atmosphere and ocean, the current climate models from the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology also include new findings about the effects of aerosols and the influence of the earth's carbon cycle. The results confirm speculations over recent years that humans are having a large and unprecedented influence on the climate and are fuelling global warming."


The institute you are talking about not only agrees with man-made climate change, it is giving one of the more radical outlooks out of most of the speculations I've seen.

The Max-Planck Institute is the Max-Planck Institute regardless of which place the document comes from.

Also the director of that documentary you linked, also made a documentary saying that silicon boobs are healthy for women and prevent cancer.

Seriously, do you really know wtf you are talking about?
Come play Android Netrunner - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=409008
.zch
Profile Joined July 2010
37 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 03:07:01
July 06 2010 03:00 GMT
#134
Gregsen, I have two brief points.
1) Quote from sciencedaily.com news article:
Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg
In addition to the findings about the complex interplay between atmosphere and ocean, the current climate models from the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology also include new findings about the effects of aerosols and the influence of the earth's carbon cycle. The results confirm speculations over recent years that humans are having a large and unprecedented influence on the climate and are fuelling global warming.

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051001100632.htm
Sorry buddy. You're just not right.

2) If you truly think that all the people partaking in a world-wide academic invitational meeting like the "WMO/IAEA Meeting of Experts on Carbon Dioxide, Other Greenhouse Gases, and Related Tracer Measurement Techniques" are all somehow lackeys of the IPCC, then there's really not much hope for you. This isn't some sort of cool-kids club where only people published in one of the IPCC reports are allowed to join, it's an academic meeting.

PS: Funny that the report I cited from Max Planck Institute in Jena actually had nothing to do with IPCC whereas your Institute in Hamburg that you hold in such high regard directly reported to the IPCC, as shown in the article.

EDIT: Touche, Sluggaslamoo. It's good to see that other people are checking his sources as well. You beat me to it with the quote; I took a Day[9] break. GG, well done.
SnK-Arcbound
Profile Joined March 2005
United States4423 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 03:23:14
July 06 2010 03:21 GMT
#135
On July 05 2010 17:38 love1another wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 05 2010 12:21 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
Yeah, in the last 100 years temperatures have gone up.... when you look at adjusted data rather than actual temperatures.
[...images omitted...]
I could post lots of things about statistical accuracy. But I'll just leave it at Global Warming hasn't met the scientifically significant statistical relevance to be considered "true". So if you're saying it's true, you're wrong.

You're using yearly measurements. If you use the daily measurements, your confidence interval shrinks by a factor of sqrt(~365) and it is then statistically significant.

Calculating daily variability of climate doesn't increase your confidence interval, because you use a less statistically relevant amount of time.

We have 800,000 years of ice core data of the earth. Will one day be more accurate, or 100 years? What you are suggesting is that picking one person randomly would be more accurate than sampling thousands.

On July 05 2010 12:40 zeppelin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 05 2010 12:21 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
I could post lots of things about statistical accuracy.


i would love to see them, especially if they all missed the point you think they're making as embarrassingly as that sciencedaily link you provided


And what you don't understand is that my post didn't have anything to do with statistical accuracy, something that goes way over your head.

On July 06 2010 08:58 zeppelin wrote:
here's some more data maybe it will be helpful
+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]
[image loading]
[image loading]
[image loading]

So arctic ice is shrinking... and yet antarctic ice is growing. If temperature was increasing, both would be shrinking.
[image loading]
[image loading]
zeppelin
Profile Joined December 2007
United States565 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-07-06 03:48:14
July 06 2010 03:46 GMT
#136
On July 06 2010 12:21 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
So arctic ice is shrinking... and yet antarctic ice is growing. If temperature was increasing, both would be shrinking.


what? how does that make any logical sense at all?

a thought experiment:
suppose the entire northern hemisphere gets exactly 10 degrees warmer
suppose the entire southern hemisphere gets exactly 2 degrees colder

in this situation the average temperature of the earth has now gone up even though it did not go up in every single area (or even a majority of areas)

how can you possibly believe that this flimsy butchering of logic disproves all of the satellite and geological data collected over the last several decades
zeppelin
Profile Joined December 2007
United States565 Posts
July 06 2010 03:57 GMT
#137
oh well it's not actually getting warmer on this hot summer day because someone is having a cookout and the air is getting colder over the ice cooler they just brought out

if the temperature was increasing, it would be getting warmer there too
chaoser
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
United States5541 Posts
July 07 2010 15:26 GMT
#138
2. I hope you understand on a basic level how and economy works. Producing such technologies requires huge industrial investment, that includes money, materials, and people. Producing these technologies gives jobs and increases wealth to many people (not just some fictional tyrant who is 'king of wind power'


I'm sorry, I just have to say, that made me laugh so much. I'm also waiting on Gregsen's response to all the sources being posted lol.
Haven't you heard? I'm not an ex-progamer. I'm not a poker player. I'm not an admin of the site. I'm mother fucking Rekrul.
SnK-Arcbound
Profile Joined March 2005
United States4423 Posts
July 09 2010 05:45 GMT
#139
On July 06 2010 12:46 zeppelin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 06 2010 12:21 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
So arctic ice is shrinking... and yet antarctic ice is growing. If temperature was increasing, both would be shrinking.


what? how does that make any logical sense at all?

a thought experiment:
suppose the entire northern hemisphere gets exactly 10 degrees warmer
suppose the entire southern hemisphere gets exactly 2 degrees colder

in this situation the average temperature of the earth has now gone up even though it did not go up in every single area (or even a majority of areas)

how can you possibly believe that this flimsy butchering of logic disproves all of the satellite and geological data collected over the last several decades

What you fail to understand, is that we have two arctic area's on the earth. You are trying to say that the northern hemisphere's arctic ice is more representative than southern ice. Why not say the eastern ice is more important than western ice then? Maybe the earth is warmer on the top because it has a fever?

Antarctic ice is up 45% since the 1980's, yet the 7% decline in arctic ice is obviously more important. Now what "satellite and geological data collected over the last several decades" are you referring to?

What you also fail to understand in that if CO2 caused warming, we wouldn't even need to look at industrial age CO2 production. We would just look at over 800,000 years or CO2 measurements and temperatures that have been collected. Simply put, there is no statistically significant correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere and global temperatures.

As for things about the original report; It's called 'The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review", but the university paid for and solicited the report.

These Learned Men, having Inquir’d into the Case for the Opposition, discover’d that the Opposition had no Case and were Devoid of Merit, which was what they Suspected all along, and they arriv’d at this Happy Conclusion by the most Economical and Nice of all Methods of Enquiry, which was that they did not Invite the Opposition to confuse Matters by Participating in the Discussion.
-Robert Anton Wilson
EmeraldSparks
Profile Blog Joined January 2008
United States1451 Posts
July 09 2010 05:49 GMT
#140
On July 09 2010 14:45 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 06 2010 12:46 zeppelin wrote:
On July 06 2010 12:21 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
So arctic ice is shrinking... and yet antarctic ice is growing. If temperature was increasing, both would be shrinking.


what? how does that make any logical sense at all?

a thought experiment:
suppose the entire northern hemisphere gets exactly 10 degrees warmer
suppose the entire southern hemisphere gets exactly 2 degrees colder

in this situation the average temperature of the earth has now gone up even though it did not go up in every single area (or even a majority of areas)

how can you possibly believe that this flimsy butchering of logic disproves all of the satellite and geological data collected over the last several decades

What you fail to understand, is that we have two arctic area's on the earth. You are trying to say that the northern hemisphere's arctic ice is more representative than southern ice. Why not say the eastern ice is more important than western ice then? Maybe the earth is warmer on the top because it has a fever?

Antarctic ice is up 45% since the 1980's, yet the 7% decline in arctic ice is obviously more important. Now what "satellite and geological data collected over the last several decades" are you referring to?

What you also fail to understand in that if CO2 caused warming, we wouldn't even need to look at industrial age CO2 production. We would just look at over 800,000 years or CO2 measurements and temperatures that have been collected. Simply put, there is no statistically significant correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere and global temperatures.

[image loading]

Nope, none whatsoever.

On July 09 2010 14:45 SnK-Arcbound wrote:
As for things about the original report; It's called 'The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review", but the university paid for and solicited the report.

Show nested quote +
These Learned Men, having Inquir’d into the Case for the Opposition, discover’d that the Opposition had no Case and were Devoid of Merit, which was what they Suspected all along, and they arriv’d at this Happy Conclusion by the most Economical and Nice of all Methods of Enquiry, which was that they did not Invite the Opposition to confuse Matters by Participating in the Discussion.
-Robert Anton Wilson

Yeah, the leadership of the university ordered a third party to investigate one of their departments for fraud, because keeping frauds within the walls of your research university means that the good name of your university is tarnished.
But why?
Prev 1 5 6 7 8 9 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 13h 22m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nathanias 159
JuggernautJason155
BRAT_OK 59
StarCraft: Brood War
Larva 573
TY 169
Aegong 30
JulyZerg 9
Dota 2
capcasts230
League of Legends
Grubby3586
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K667
oskar191
flusha83
taco 49
Super Smash Bros
Chillindude3
Mew2King1
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu633
Other Games
tarik_tv5419
FrodaN2656
summit1g2360
Hui .278
Trikslyr60
Sick49
PPMD40
Organizations
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 22 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 26
• StrangeGG 22
• poizon28 21
• tFFMrPink 19
• LUISG 15
• Adnapsc2 10
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• sooper7s
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• HerbMon 18
• 80smullet 16
• FirePhoenix4
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22538
League of Legends
• Doublelift3553
Other Games
• imaqtpie1187
Upcoming Events
CranKy Ducklings
13h 22m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
17h 22m
CSO Cup
19h 22m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
21h 22m
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
1d 12h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 17h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 21h
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Online Event
3 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
4 days
[ Show More ]
The PondCast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.