Another Global Warming Oops Moment

This is the source article: Wind farms can actually INCREASE climate change by raising temperatures, warn academics | Mail Online


I would like to see the actual study. And that article is basing everything on th observation of a single wind farm, and then everything from there is extrapoloated outward into "ifs" and "coulds" and "maybes".

That's been the story with so-called "climate science" from the beginning, hasn't it? It's all "ifs" and "coulds" and "maybes."

Bad science is bad science. Don't get all stoned on bad science you agree with out of misplaced confirmation bias.

AGW is all bad science. Your post is a classic case of transference. It's uncanny how all posts by warmists suffer from the same psychological issues.
We do realize that to republicans reality is bad science
 
This is the source article: Wind farms can actually INCREASE climate change by raising temperatures, warn academics | Mail Online


I would like to see the actual study. And that article is basing everything on th observation of a single wind farm, and then everything from there is extrapoloated outward into "ifs" and "coulds" and "maybes".

That's been the story with so-called "climate science" from the beginning, hasn't it? It's all "ifs" and "coulds" and "maybes."

Bad science is bad science. Don't get all stoned on bad science you agree with out of misplaced confirmation bias.

AGW is all bad science. Your post is a classic case of transference. It's uncanny how all posts by warmists suffer from the same psychological issues.
We do realize that to republicans reality is bad science

How many personalities you have using the term we? Problem is global warmers had to ignore reality in order for their science to have any chance at all.
 
This is the source article: Wind farms can actually INCREASE climate change by raising temperatures, warn academics | Mail Online


I would like to see the actual study. And that article is basing everything on th observation of a single wind farm, and then everything from there is extrapoloated outward into "ifs" and "coulds" and "maybes".

That's been the story with so-called "climate science" from the beginning, hasn't it? It's all "ifs" and "coulds" and "maybes."

Bad science is bad science. Don't get all stoned on bad science you agree with out of misplaced confirmation bias.

AGW is all bad science. Your post is a classic case of transference. It's uncanny how all posts by warmists suffer from the same psychological issues.
We do realize that to republicans reality is bad science

Can you please post the one repeatable lab experiment that shows how a .01% change in the chemical composition of the atmosphere causes "Global Warming"?
 
Another Global Warming Oops Moment - Orange Punch : The Orange County Register

Today we have yet another example of what was unintended, but probably could have been seen coming had our government know-it-alls not been blinded by their ideological mission. We call these Global Warming Oops Moments. There’s no shortage of them. “While President Barack Obama is touting clean energy such as wind farms, a group of American scientists are raising alarm bells that wind turbines increase the effects of global warming, as well as killing birds that fall prey to the deadly spinning blades,” says an item from Dallasblog.com.

Ah come on, a Goddamned blog? No link to the supposed science article? Do you understand why hearsay evidence has no standing in court, and even less in science?

How about pure logic? If you think that a gas that comprises only .00392% of the atmosphere can change the climate, what do you think taking the energetic content out of the wind will do? If you lose part of the cooling effect of convection via the wind you will certainly get warmer. Have you seen the giant wind farms China is building? do you think that may have had something to do with the recent harsh conditions in California?

Why Is China Building These Gigantic Structures In the Middle of the Desert? (Update 3)
 
20110519_0052_1-14.jpg
 
That's reality, Frank.

CO2 warms the earth. This was proven experimentally in 1859.

You know that.

You are just being a contrarian.

The 1859 experiment was a closed system experiment. :lol:

Oh for God's sake. The 1859 experiment by Tyndall measured the absorption bands of various GHGs.

Could they even measure a .01% change in the atmosphere back then?

We can now, so why can't you link to a single experiment showing us how and why that works?
 
Anyone who argues against global warming in light of the mountain of evidence from scientists all over the world, would argue gravity has no role in plane crashes.
 
The boys at MIT believe AGW will raise the temperature 4-7 degrees in the next century.

I think they are being conservative because the feedback effects will push it to the high side of that.

It's already happening.

This winter is the warmest I can ever remember.

prinn-roulette-4.jpg


The boys at MIT should be booted off campus next to Venkman and Spengler

IS there a repeatable lab experiment showing how that works of all you have is "Wheel of Climate Change"?

Who cares?

MIT is our best and brightest. You can make fun of them all you want, but they are smarter than you or I.


HOLY MOTHER OF GOD

I too was romantcized by what the colleges and universities pontificated about..........WHEN I WAS 20 YEARS OLD!!!:2up:


s0n.........what rock do you live under?:D


Shit.......the most dangerous people on this planet are the dolts who blindly put their faith in acedemia and government.......as if there are no special interests involved where acedemia is concerned. Ive always been fascinated about how that dynamic manifests itself?


Heres a clue asshole..............boring science = no money.:gay:
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top