Arctic Ice

[Crick]

That's an interesting claim since my view is the one supported by thousands of peer reviewed studies whiles yours is supported by nothing. Heliocentrism was never (and could not be) supported by any application of the scientific method

 

[SSDD]

That's an interesting claim since my view is the one supported by thousands of peer reviewed studies whiles yours is supported by nothing. Heliocentrism was never (and could not be) supported by any application of the scientific method

Deny on garth....your pseudoscience is beginning to experience its death throes....it is a pleasure to watch...

 

[RollingThunder]

That's an interesting claim since my view is the one supported by thousands of peer reviewed studies whiles yours is supported by nothing. Heliocentrism was never (and could not be) supported by any application of the scientific method

Deny on garth....your pseudoscience is beginning to experience its death throes....it is a pleasure to watch...

...Says the delusional anti-science denier cult troll as his crackpot cult of reality denial inexorably slides down the poop-chute into the septic tank of history.

 

[Crick]

That's an interesting claim since my view is the one supported by thousands of peer reviewed studies whiles yours is supported by nothing. Heliocentrism was never (and could not be) supported by any application of the scientific method

Deny on garth....your pseudoscience is beginning to experience its death throes....it is a pleasure to watch...

What "death throes" are you watching? The EPA's budget getting slashed? Are you insanely stupid enough to believe that's based on the slightest shred of science?

 

[SSDD]

A thinking person might take note of the number of papers being published that are skeptical of the AGW hypothesis...but hell, I am not talking to a thinking person...am I?

 

[Crick]

Let's see them. Let's see "the number of papers" skeptical of AGW being published.

 

[RollingThunder]

Let's see them. Let's see "the number of papers" skeptical of AGW being published.

Those supposed "papers" disputing AGW that the denier cultists are always claiming to have are just invisible to us sane people because we don't live in the crackpot 'alternative reality' called 'Denier Cult Bizarroworld". I'm sure you could find them all there.

 

[SSDD]

Let's see them. Let's see "the number of papers" skeptical of AGW being published.

Here is a start...There are about 600 covered in the links below since 2016...kind of crushes the claim of consensus....and settled science..

Skeptic Papers 2016 (1)
Skeptic Papers 2016 (2)
Skeptic Papers 2016 (3)
Skeptic Papers 2015
Skeptic Papers 2014

 

[RollingThunder]

Let's see them. Let's see "the number of papers" skeptical of AGW being published.

Here is a start...There are about 600 covered in the links below since 2016...kind of crushes the claim of consensus....and settled science..

Skeptic Papers 2016 (1)
Skeptic Papers 2016 (2)
Skeptic Papers 2016 (3)
Skeptic Papers 2015
Skeptic Papers 2014

An example of the so-called "scientific papers" on these lists that come from a crackpot denier cult blog.....

"The Sun's Role in Climate"
Chapter (PDF Available) · September 2016 with 702 Reads
In book: Evidence-Based Climate Science (Second Edition), Edition: 2, Chapter: 6, Publisher: Elsevier, Editors: Don Easterbrook, pp.283-306"

Or, in other words, not a peer-reviewed scientific paper at all....just a pseudo-science book put together by a denier cult nutbag, retired Professor of glacial geology, and stooge for the fossil fuel industry.

"Don Easterbrook is a Professor Emeritus of Glacial Geology and Environmental and Engineering Geology at Western Washington University. [28]

Don Easterbrook is the editor of Evidence-Based Climate Science, a book which claims to produce data that is “counter-global-warming evidence not embraced by proponents of CO2.” The book (PDF) includes work by Easterbrook himself, and a range of noted climate change deniers including Steve Goddard, Joseph D’Aleo,Nils-Axel Mörner, David Archibald, Nicola Scafetta, Christopher Monckton, and others. [29], [33]

Easterbrook is a regular speaker at the Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change. The Heartland Institute and its conference sponsors have collectively received millions of dollars in funding from the fossil fuel industry. [30]

In 2013, Easterbrook argued before the Washington State Senate Committee on Climate Change that peer-reviewed data showing global warming had been “tampered with by NOAA and NASA.” In the same presentation, he also said that ”CO2 cannot possibly cause global warming,” and that “Global warming ended in 1998.” [40]"
(source)

Or check out....

Denier Don Easterbrook gets it all wrong in his absurd fairytale on WUWT
HotWhopper
SEPTEMBER 26, 2013
Denier Don Easterbrook is America's answer to the potty peer from the UK, Christopher Monckton. He's written an article on WUWT (archived here) in which it's hard to find half a sentence of his that might have a grain of truth to it. The exceptions would be his direct quotes from an article in National Geographic.

A few weeks ago Anthony Watts told his readers not to be alarmed because ice can't melt when it gets hotter, therefore seas can't rise any faster and New York can't get any wetter. He didn't phrase it quite like that but that's what his article all boiled down to. He was referring to this same National Geographic article.

Today Anthony Watts has gone even further and put up an article by denier Don Easterbrook (more of his deceptions here) that rivals his various claims like "the average surface temperature of earth equals minus 30 degrees Celsius as shown by my temperature chart for Central Greenland".

Denier Don is (still) an Emeritus Professor from a University that he's continually embarrassing. They don't withdraw titles too easily and I guess that he's not the first professor to have "gone emeritus" and won't be the last.

.....(a lot more on the website).....

 

[SSDD]

What do you know...one paper out of hundreds...you are a true crackpot thunder...a tragically damaged crackpot..but a crackpot none the less...watch closely in the coming years as your glassy eyed chanting cult is swept into the laughing stock column of history.

 

[Crick]

What percentage of these authors do you think disagree with the conclusions of the IPCC? One in a hundred? Less? I see lots of papers in the first group correlating (and we all know what you love to say about correlations - at least when they're on our side) sunspots and ENSO. Trouble is, ENSO isn't global warming, is it. Then there are correlations between sunspots and local variables: bog acidity in northern Ireland, leaf fall timing on the northern California coast, aquifer dynamics in the Huasco region... What we do NOT see a lot of is folks finding that changes in the sun's output is responsible for the warming of the last 150 years.

 

[Old Rocks]

A thinking person might take note of the number of papers being published that are skeptical of the AGW hypothesis...but hell, I am not talking to a thinking person...am I?

OK, link to them. Thus far all we have from you is flap yap and links to sites not credible at all.

 

[Old Rocks]

Let's see them. Let's see "the number of papers" skeptical of AGW being published.

Here is a start...There are about 600 covered in the links below since 2016...kind of crushes the claim of consensus....and settled science..

Skeptic Papers 2016 (1)
Skeptic Papers 2016 (2)
Skeptic Papers 2016 (3)
Skeptic Papers 2015
Skeptic Papers 2014

Laughing out loud for a long time....................

The Earth’s climate system recurrent & multi-scale lagged responses: empirical law, evidence, consequent solar explanation of recent CO2 increases & preliminary analysis

http://www.earth-syst-dynam-discuss.net/esd-2016-38/esd-2016-38.pdf

Jorge Sánchez-Sesma

1,2 1 5 Instituto Mexicano de Tecnología del Agua, Jiutepc, Morelos, 62550, Mexico 2Now, independent consultant, Cuernavaca, Morelos, 62440, Mexico Correspondence to: Jorge Sánchez-Sesma ([email protected])

Abstract. This paper analyzes the lagged responses of the Earth’s climate system, as part of cosmic-solar-terrestrial processes. Firstly, we analyze and model the lagged responses of the Earth’s climate system, previously detected for 10 geological and orbital scale processes, with simple non-linear functions, and we estimate a correspondent lag of ~1600-yr for the recently detected ~9500-yr scale solar recurrent patterns. Secondly, a recurrent and lagged linear influence of solar variation on volcanic activity and carbon dioxide (CO2) has been assessed for the last millennia, and extrapolated for future centuries and millennia. As a consequence we found that, on one side, the recent CO2 increase can be considered as a lagged response to solar activity, and, on the other side, the continental tropical climate signal during late Holocene can be 15 considered as a sum of three lagged responses to solar activity, through direct, and indirect (volcanic and CO2), influences with different lags of around 40, 800 and 1600 years. Thirdly, we find more examples of this ~1600-yr lag, associated with oceanic processes throughout the Holocene, manifested in the mineral content of SE Pacific waters, and in a carbon cycle index, CO3, in the Southern Atlantic. Fourthly, we propose the global ocean circulation processes, that include the well known meridional overturning circulation, and the thermohaline circulation, as a global mechanism capable of explaining the 20 lagged forcing (volcanic activity & CO2) and continental tropical climate responses to solar activity variations. Finally, some conclusions are provided for the lagged responses of the Earth’s climate system with their influences and consequences on present and future climate, and implications for climate modelling are preliminarily analyzed.

Good God! The increase from 280 ppm to 400+ ppm can be considered as a lagged response? What the hell is that person thinking? We have records for 800,000 years of CO2 levels from the ice cores from Antarctica. There is no previous time where there has been that kind of increase in the period with are seeing it. Not only that, we have records of the amount of fossil fuels that we have burned, creating CO2.

If that is the level of your 'evidence', you are a fool. Easily refuted by anyone with the slightest logical abilities.

 

[SSDD]

Laughing out loud for a long time....................

The Earth’s climate system recurrent & multi-scale lagged responses: empirical law, evidence, consequent solar explanation of recent CO2 increases & preliminary analysis.

Laughing even longer at you thunder...the scientists is simply acknowledging the lagged response of CO2 to temperature that every ice core ever done shows....and you are angry?...interesting...and yet, you moisten your panties over some fake science that is later retracted claiming that CO2 causes warming.

Chant on you glassy eyed cultist...chant on.

 

[Crick]

Then he missed the bit where he was supposed correlate sunspots to global temperature since it is THAT to which CO2 is linked.

 

[SSDD]

Then he missed the bit where he was supposed correlate sunspots to global temperature since it is THAT to which CO2 is linked.

CO2 is only linked to climate in the sense that it's quantity changes in response to temperature changes...

 

[Crick]

And when humans (or massive vulcanism or global fires from a large bolide strike) dump billions and billions of tons into the air.

 

[SSDD]

And when humans (or massive vulcanism or global fires from a large bolide strike) dump billions and billions of tons into the air.

CO2 is not capable of altering the global temperature till enough is added to significantly alter the mass of the atmosphere...and there isn't enough raw material on earth to produce enough CO2 for that to happen.

 

[RollingThunder]

What do you know...one paper out of hundreds...you are a true crackpot thunder...a tragically damaged crackpot..but a crackpot none the less...watch closely in the coming years as your glassy eyed chanting cult is swept into the laughing stock column of history.

....Says the anti-science crackpot denier cult troll with the phony lists of not-do-real pseudo-science "papers"

Sorry dufus, but it is your cult of braindead reality denial that is sliding down the poop chute into the septic tank of history.

 

[RollingThunder]

CO2 is not capable of altering the global temperature till enough is added to significantly alter the mass of the atmosphere...and there isn't enough raw material on earth to produce enough CO2 for that to happen.

Just more raw, anti-science denier cult insanity!