Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

[skookerasbil]

gotta love when the k00ks keep throwing zero's!!!!!!!!!!

 

[edthecynic]

It does look like there has been warming since 1800, and that was the likely outcome.

Good for Muller for checking this work.

Now, if anyone can link that warming to being caused in any significant manner to man-made CO2, then the skeptics will be happy.

Contrary to popular belief, few of the scientific 'skeptics' argued that there was no warming. They surely did want honest data, but more importantly they want the science to support any claims that man-made CO2 caused any warming, and if it did, the magnitude and significance of that contribution.

The science does not support any conclusions on that.

OH BULLSHIT!!!
The deniers have been claiming the globe has been COOLING since 1998!!!

no global warming since 1998 - Google Search

Ummm, no we havn't. We've said that the warming had levelled off. It also appear that we are entering into a cooling phase, but we won't know that for sure for another couple of years. The Earth doesn't have a thermostat that you switch on and off. It takes time for trends to become apparent.

As far as the op ed that Muller released, I don't see anything wrong with it except for the part where he ascribes the warming to human causes with no supporting evidence. He is an avowed warmist after all, but when he gets the paper through peer review we will see what he really has to say.

The present decade is the warmest in the history of direct instrument measurement, so to deniers that means warming has leveled off. Next, to CON$, we will enter a cooling phase of steady temperatures.

Mind you there have been no "cooling phases" for the last 100 years even though according to the natural cycle warming phases should be followed by cooling phases. For the last 100 years warming phases have been followed by level phases which are followed by new warming phases that begin at about the same level as the last warming phase left off.

And Muller is an avowed skeptic!

 

[skookerasbil]

:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d:d

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Global warming skeptics suspected climate change scientists were hiding data. So the skeptics paid for a new study to find the real truth. The results are in! And they're identical to previous results: Humans are heating up the earth.

University of California physics professor Richard Muller, one of the most vocal skeptics, gathered a team of 10 scientists, mostly physicists, including 2011 Nobel Physics Prize winner Saul Perlmutter, to create the Berkeley Earth Project.

Muller et. al. thought that data from weather stations used for previous studies may have been off because those located close to cities would record artificially warm temperatures. So the Berkeley Earth Project used new methods to re-analyze data from 40,000 weather stations. And guess what? The resulting graph looks almost exactly the same as the graphs from previous studies.

Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

What an incredibly idiotic take on what happened, and you wonder why people reject everything people like you have to say on the subject.

 

[skookerasbil]

Still waiting on a single link from the k00ks.................and this is coming up on a year of requests!!!

For the curious who are coming in here to get some information on the climate debate, heres the poop>>>>>>>>>

THE GOAL of the climate alarmists is to do one thing: ramp up the angst so to push the country into a totally green economy. Which means.......massive carbon taxes. It is the only way to do it. And despite the "consensus" that global warming is a huge ass threat, as evidenced by the data..........where the fcukk is the climate legislation via congress to put a cap on carbon emmissions?? Where is it? The alarmist k00ks do this celebration thing on here like they've won the debate. Which leaves one question...................



Where is the climate legislation assholes????



Lastly.........to the curious. You will note, were not going to see one single link in response. But you can gaurantee alot of follow-up posts to this one that will say something like, "retard"......."stupid slackjawed denier"......"nutter"........denier cultist".


Ahh...............but zero links!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It does look like there has been warming since 1800, and that was the likely outcome.

Good for Muller for checking this work.

Now, if anyone can link that warming to being caused in any significant manner to man-made CO2, then the skeptics will be happy.

Contrary to popular belief, few of the scientific 'skeptics' argued that there was no warming. They surely did want honest data, but more importantly they want the science to support any claims that man-made CO2 caused any warming, and if it did, the magnitude and significance of that contribution.

The science does not support any conclusions on that.

OH BULLSHIT!!!
The deniers have been claiming the globe has been COOLING since 1998!!!

no global warming since 1998 - Google Search

Do you understand the difference between denying something and being a skeptic about the claims that ocean levels will raise 200 feet unless we all go back to horse and buggy days?

I didn't think so.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Man made climate change is a fabrication of the Marxist left to engage in world wide wealth redistribution and control the way people live.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Global warming skeptics suspected climate change scientists were hiding data. So the skeptics paid for a new study to find the real truth. The results are in! And they're identical to previous results: Humans are heating up the earth.

University of California physics professor Richard Muller, one of the most vocal skeptics, gathered a team of 10 scientists, mostly physicists, including 2011 Nobel Physics Prize winner Saul Perlmutter, to create the Berkeley Earth Project.

Muller et. al. thought that data from weather stations used for previous studies may have been off because those located close to cities would record artificially warm temperatures. So the Berkeley Earth Project used new methods to re-analyze data from 40,000 weather stations. And guess what? The resulting graph looks almost exactly the same as the graphs from previous studies.

Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

If you're really worried about our emissions of CO2 heating the globe, you'd support building a couple of dozen new nuclear power plants that we know work, instead of wasting billions on solar and wind that doesn't work yet.

 

[RDD_1210]

Global warming skeptics suspected climate change scientists were hiding data. So the skeptics paid for a new study to find the real truth. The results are in! And they're identical to previous results: Humans are heating up the earth.

University of California physics professor Richard Muller, one of the most vocal skeptics, gathered a team of 10 scientists, mostly physicists, including 2011 Nobel Physics Prize winner Saul Perlmutter, to create the Berkeley Earth Project.

Muller et. al. thought that data from weather stations used for previous studies may have been off because those located close to cities would record artificially warm temperatures. So the Berkeley Earth Project used new methods to re-analyze data from 40,000 weather stations. And guess what? The resulting graph looks almost exactly the same as the graphs from previous studies.

Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

What an incredibly idiotic take on what happened, and you wonder why people reject everything people like you have to say on the subject.

Thanks for the insightful response. Your contribution to this thread is priceless.

 

[SW2SILVER]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

What is the damage that "too much CO2" will cause? How much will it cost to prevent the damage? How much will it cost to repair the damage?

Until you can get real answers for those questions, we'd rather not destroy our economy.

 

[SW2SILVER]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

What is the damage that "too much CO2" will cause? How much will it cost to prevent the damage? How much will it cost to repair the damage?

Until you can get real answers for those questions, we'd rather not destroy our economy.

You just want real proof? Look around you. It is there, not in any posts here. Or sacrifice all to the all mighty economy. Look. All I ask.

 

[daveman]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

All the proposed "solutions" to AGW will collapse the world economy.

 

[SW2SILVER]

I can't cure cancer. I can't. But being skeptical isn't a practical option, either, is it? Curing cancer may cost us billions. Stopping global warming may cost us plenty, but stopping the inevitable collapse of both our economy and our ecological system? Which of the two do you value more? Our existence or the economy?

 

[code1211]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

What is the damage that "too much CO2" will cause? How much will it cost to prevent the damage? How much will it cost to repair the damage?

Until you can get real answers for those questions, we'd rather not destroy our economy.

You just want real proof? Look around you. It is there, not in any posts here. Or sacrifice all to the all mighty economy. Look. All I ask.

Do us a favor. What are we looking for?

 

[code1211]

I can't cure cancer. I can't. But being skeptical isn't a practical option, either, is it? Curing cancer may cost us billions. Stopping global warming may cost us plenty, but stopping the inevitable collapse of both our economy and our ecological system? Which of the two do you value more? Our existence or the economy?

Before you try to reverse the cause of Global Warming, proving the cause of Global of warming seems the intelligetnt thing to do.

How do you propose reversing a cause if you don't know what the cause might be?

 

[westwall]

OH BULLSHIT!!!
The deniers have been claiming the globe has been COOLING since 1998!!!

no global warming since 1998 - Google Search

Ummm, no we havn't. We've said that the warming had levelled off. It also appear that we are entering into a cooling phase, but we won't know that for sure for another couple of years. The Earth doesn't have a thermostat that you switch on and off. It takes time for trends to become apparent.

As far as the op ed that Muller released, I don't see anything wrong with it except for the part where he ascribes the warming to human causes with no supporting evidence. He is an avowed warmist after all, but when he gets the paper through peer review we will see what he really has to say.

The present decade is the warmest in the history of direct instrument measurement, so to deniers that means warming has leveled off. Next, to CON$, we will enter a cooling phase of steady temperatures.

Mind you there have been no "cooling phases" for the last 100 years even though according to the natural cycle warming phases should be followed by cooling phases. For the last 100 years warming phases have been followed by level phases which are followed by new warming phases that begin at about the same level as the last warming phase left off.

And Muller is an avowed skeptic!

You are so funny! This decade is only the warmest with shenanigans. If they were to actually use ALL of weather stations instead of their cherry picked few in cities and at airports it would be cooler, but that's real science not the activist BS Hansen and company are now renowned for.

And Muller a sceptic? If you believe that you are a bigger moron then I thought. He's a warmist through and through and just like the others he too is invested heavily in the Green con, just not in their con, he's running his own con.

It will be interesting to see his peer reviewed paper when it comes out though. I am looking forward to reading his findings and learning what he thinks of the recent NOAA efforts to correct the faulty weather stations pointed out by Watts and his group.

 

[westwall]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

Yeah sure, we should do something NOW. Just like you types who said we need to put MTBE in the gasoline NOW to fix the air pollution. How'd that work out fo you? Oh yeah, I remember, you poisoned water wells throughout CA and caused billions and billions of dollars in environmental damage. Smart move that. I guess you didn't learn from that mistake and want to do it all over again.

And BTW, according to even the UN, if trends continue, the human population will stabalise at around 9 billion. No histrionics, no need to go out and commit genocide like Obama's science advisor advocated, just let nature run its course and all will be fine.

Of course you won't get to steal peoples money that way, and you won't be able to set up your totalitarian government that way, but everything will be OK.

 

[westwall]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

What is the damage that "too much CO2" will cause? How much will it cost to prevent the damage? How much will it cost to repair the damage?

Until you can get real answers for those questions, we'd rather not destroy our economy.

You just want real proof? Look around you. It is there, not in any posts here. Or sacrifice all to the all mighty economy. Look. All I ask.

Point it out to us please. CO2 makes plants grow real good. That is proven. Your theory is full of holes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Few people are debating there is climate change, but quite a few folks on this board seem rather loath to admit the possibility that humans are the primary cause. Besides the political crap, the only reason to deny CO2 pollution comes down to protecting the economy and profit, not some niggling obsession on scientific objectivity. The economy is like Jupiter, and he ate is own children. The economy is a monster we had ALL better learn to control, not let it dominate US. That is were this is going, a total collapse of both the economy and the ecological system. When the means to providing food to 7 billion people collapses, what the hell is going to happen? THAT is were this is going, and IF we can do something about it NOW, we better try.

What is the damage that "too much CO2" will cause? How much will it cost to prevent the damage? How much will it cost to repair the damage?

Until you can get real answers for those questions, we'd rather not destroy our economy.

You just want real proof? Look around you. It is there, not in any posts here. Or sacrifice all to the all mighty economy. Look. All I ask.

Yes, I want real proof.

I looked around, was there supposed to be proof there? There wasn't.

Try again?