A Tutorial for Democrat supporting science invalids

[LaDexter]

First of all, you idiots do not seem to understand the difference between a THEORY (Global Warming) and a SCIENCE (Climate Change - for planet Earth and others).

Google

"the·o·ry
ˈTHēərē/
noun

1. a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained."

Global Warming is a THEORY that CO2 in the atmosphere controls Earth's surface temperature. The theory failed its very first test.... until the test was FUDGED...

Key claim against global warming evaporates


"Now, according to three new studies published in the journal Science, it turns out those conclusions based on satellite and weather balloon data were based on (COUGH COUGH) 'faulty' analyses.

The atmosphere is indeed "warming," not cooling as the ACTUAL RAW HIGHLY CORRELATED data (from both satellites and balloons) previously showed."

The satellites and balloons returned highly correlated data showing NO WARMING in the atmosphere despite rising CO2, proving CO2 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Earth climate change. With tens of billions of taxdollars at stake, the "warmers" FUDGED BOTH with UNCORRELATED "corrections."

Sorry - that's lame.

The SCIENCE of Earth climate change is about SCIENCE, not fudge, fraud, and bilking the taxpayer. It begins by NOTICING that which is not easily explained, and then ASKING A QUESTION....

WHY does one Earth polar circle, the Antarctic, have 9 times the ice of the other, the Arctic?


Indeed, the Antarctic cools Earth much more than the Arctic. Air that travels over the Antarctic cools 50F more than air going over the Arctic. The Antarctic puts 9 times the ice into the oceans vs. the Arctic, some 46 times the molecular H2O the Mississippi River dumps in the Gulf.

Understanding SCIENCE starts with ASKING QUESTIONS, not PARROTING FUDGE and FRAUD.

 

[Montrovant]

First of all, you idiots do not seem to understand the difference between a THEORY (Global Warming) and a SCIENCE (Climate Change - for planet Earth and others).

Google

"the·o·ry
ˈTHēərē/
noun

1. a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained."

Global Warming is a THEORY that CO2 in the atmosphere controls Earth's surface temperature. The theory failed its very first test.... until the test was FUDGED...

Key claim against global warming evaporates


"Now, according to three new studies published in the journal Science, it turns out those conclusions based on satellite and weather balloon data were based on (COUGH COUGH) 'faulty' analyses.

The atmosphere is indeed "warming," not cooling as the ACTUAL RAW HIGHLY CORRELATED data (from both satellites and balloons) previously showed."

The satellites and balloons returned highly correlated data showing NO WARMING in the atmosphere despite rising CO2, proving CO2 has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Earth climate change. With tens of billions of taxdollars at stake, the "warmers" FUDGED BOTH with UNCORRELATED "corrections."

Sorry - that's lame.

The SCIENCE of Earth climate change is about SCIENCE, not fudge, fraud, and bilking the taxpayer. It begins by NOTICING that which is not easily explained, and then ASKING A QUESTION....

WHY does one Earth polar circle, the Antarctic, have 9 times the ice of the other, the Arctic?


Indeed, the Antarctic cools Earth much more than the Arctic. Air that travels over the Antarctic cools 50F more than air going over the Arctic. The Antarctic puts 9 times the ice into the oceans vs. the Arctic, some 46 times the molecular H2O the Mississippi River dumps in the Gulf.

Understanding SCIENCE starts with ASKING QUESTIONS, not PARROTING FUDGE and FRAUD.

There are scientific theories. Saying something is a theory does not mean it cannot be part of scientific research or knowledge.

The article you linked says that the atmosphere is, in fact, warming. The faulty data was supposedly that which showed the atmosphere cooling. How does that in any way show that the theory of CO2 in the atmosphere affecting temperature is false?

Did you actually read the article? They explain why the data is different for older vs newer weather balloons, which led researchers to believe the atmosphere was cooling. They also briefly explain that the satellite data was originally given a faulty correction.

You appear to have reached faulty conclusions about the 11 year old article you've linked to.

 

[Russ Alllah Gehry]

First of all, you idiots do not seem to understand the difference between a THEORY (Global Warming) and a SCIENCE (Climate Change - for planet Earth and others).

First of all, what frigging language are you writing in?

 

[LaDexter]

The article you linked says that the atmosphere is, in fact, warming

LOL!!!!

Parrot is as parrot does. BAWK.


You have two and only two measures (satellite and balloon) of the same thing - atmospheric temps. If both give highly correlated data, there is no reason to question that data. The desire to question that data was the first major red flag. They didn't like the data, which showed no warming in the atmosphere.

If you are "correcting" data, it should correlate to the reality of the data. The two corrections they gave were laughable - the balloon thermometers were "wrong" (one time fix) while the satellites had "orbit wobble," meaning the "adjustment," if you believed in the wobble, would be 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002 degrees, but gradual, not all at once.

The entire "correction" here is what keeps so many sure this is nothing but deliberate fraud. Your theory is CO2 causes warming. The data shows rising CO2 and NO WARMING. Your side DID NOT LIKE THAT. So it FUDGED, laughably...

because so many "believers" in the FRAUD such as yourself are nothing but science invalids and ....

 

[LaDexter]

what frigging language are you writing in?

LOL!!!!

WHY does one Earth polar circle have 9 times the ice of the other?


If you aren't attempting to answer that, you have no business posting in this topic. That is the question. Answer it or admit you are just here to flame and obstruct....

 

[whitehall]

The guy who started the whole global warming thing was a disgruntled political loser with no science background. Al Gore wanted to punish Americans for not electing him president and at the same time he would get rich selling fake "carbon credits". He lived in a compound that used more energy than a small city while he lectured Americans about energy use.

 

[Montrovant]

The article you linked says that the atmosphere is, in fact, warming

LOL!!!!

Parrot is as parrot does. BAWK.


You have two and only two measures (satellite and balloon) of the same thing - atmospheric temps. If both give highly correlated data, there is no reason to question that data. The desire to question that data was the first major red flag. They didn't like the data, which showed no warming in the atmosphere.

If you are "correcting" data, it should correlate to the reality of the data. The two corrections they gave were laughable - the balloon thermometers were "wrong" (one time fix) while the satellites had "orbit wobble," meaning the "adjustment," if you believed in the wobble, would be 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002 degrees, but gradual, not all at once.

The entire "correction" here is what keeps so many sure this is nothing but deliberate fraud. Your theory is CO2 causes warming. The data shows rising CO2 and NO WARMING. Your side DID NOT LIKE THAT. So it FUDGED, laughably...

because so many "believers" in the FRAUD such as yourself are nothing but science invalids and ....

You're the one who posted the link. I pointed out that the link said the opposite of what you did.

 

[LaDexter]

You're the one who posted the link. I pointed out that the link said the opposite of what you did.

That's right, you parroted. When asked a question, you parroted again, and refused to answer it.

Asked if two measures of the same thing returning highly correlated data should be challenged, that sailed right over your beaked birdbrain. Parroting is what you do. That is all you do. You are clearly too stupid to do anything except parrot....

 

[Montrovant]

You're the one who posted the link. I pointed out that the link said the opposite of what you did.

That's right, you parroted. When asked a question, you parroted again, and refused to answer it.

Asked if two measures of the same thing returning highly correlated data should be challenged, that sailed right over your beaked birdbrain. Parroting is what you do. That is all you do. You are clearly too stupid to do anything except parrot....

Did you even read the article? The balloons gave contradictory data. The daytime data showed a cooling trend while the nighttime data showed warming.

If you are opposed to data "correction", the article states that there was a correction in the original satellite data which caused it to show cooling in the atmosphere.

And how is it "parroting" to point out in my first response that the link you posted says something different from the content of your post? Parroting is repeating something. I had not said anything at all before my first post, obviously, and I didn't say the same thing someone else did. You seem to have an issue with that word.

 

[konradv]

WHY does one Earth polar circle have 9 times the ice of the other?

Water flow. Currents warm up the water flowing under the ice in the north. Since Antarctica is a continent, there's no flowing under it.

 

[konradv]

The guy who started the whole global warming thing was a disgruntled political loser with no science background. Al Gore wanted to punish Americans for not electing him president and at the same time he would get rich selling fake "carbon credits". He lived in a compound that used more energy than a small city while he lectured Americans about energy use.

Gore did not start the whole "global warming thing". He popularized it. Another lie about the man along with the myth that he said he "invented the internet".

 

[Crick]

The myth was that he ever said he invented the internet.

 

[Russ Alllah Gehry]

stop defending Al Gore in every thread

he can defend himself

it takes opponents of Trump off message

 

[Old Rocks]

The guy who started the whole global warming thing was a disgruntled political loser with no science background. Al Gore wanted to punish Americans for not electing him president and at the same time he would get rich selling fake "carbon credits". He lived in a compound that used more energy than a small city while he lectured Americans about energy use.

You stupid dumb fuck. Your depth of ignorance is laughable. The first person to note that there was something in the atmosphere that absorbed outgoing heat was Joseph Fourier. Then John Tyndall measured the absorption spectra of the various gases in the atmosphere, and identified the GHGs, in 1859. Svante Arrhenius quantified the amount of increase in temperature from a doubling of the GHGs in the atmosphere in 1896.

All Al Gore did was use his journalistic skill to write a book about what the scientists were telling him, and made a movie about it. Dumb fucks like you flap your yap with not a clue concerning what you are talking about.

 

[Old Rocks]

Al Gore is a successful author. A successful businessman. A successful creator of a popular documentary. And, oh yes, he has also served as a Senator and Vice President. And won the popular vote for President in 2000. And the person that won the electoral college turned out to be a total screwup. A pattern we are going to see repeated one more time.