Discussion in 'Environment' started by baileyn45, Oct 12, 2019.
If it's "Science" where's the data?
Pretty fucking straightforward
Chain yourself to the Chinese Embassy to protest their carbon footprint
LinkLess, FactLess, Cumstain.
You absolutely nailed it! Bravo!
The earth’s climate is an incredibly complicated system with multiple factors which all have varying degrees of influence that constantly change. The idea that we can understand it well enough to predict what will happen over the next decade is completely absurd. That is why there has never been a model that has accurately predicted the climate. Nobody can show me a model from the last decade that predicted today’s climate.
You're not going to do anything anyway, numbskull. You can't change the weather must less the climate. The lack the means and the mentality. Besides you can't fix what isn't broken. Get a clue and quit living your life shrouded in ignorance and stupidity.
Duh, cuz wiki sed so, derp derp.
Yeah ... pretty damn amazing that the one I click didn't support your claim, it doesn't refute your claim either ... no, I haven't read any others ... when we bet on a 1 in 100 odds and win, we quit ... I'm absolute sure my next 99 clicks will be papers that confirm your claim ... so why bother? ... I would suggest reading the entire paper, especially how the researchers managed error ... the paper in question states that their time reference was corrupted, so they used a more inaccurate reference ... not my fault, just the way things are ...
If you're familiar with the ice core data, then you can see temperatures go up and back down over a 125,000 year period ... there's a lot of speculation why this is so, but no one knows for sure ... there's far more about the climate we don't know than we do ... research continues ...
How can it be confirmed when he won't release the data it's based on? No one can replicate his work because they have no access to the data. How is this science?
The data is not readily available, Mann recently lost another court case because he will not show the data. You do realize that he was held in contempt of court in British Columbia for that very reason.
For the love of God, this is not science. Look at your first statement.
"Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement, NO national or international scientific body any longer rejects the findings of human-induced effects on climate change"
No one disputes man made emissions
This is science?
Various surveys? Consensus opinions? C'mon, do better. How did she find the "928 abstracts"? This smacks of the 97% nonsense. This isn't popularity contest. You either have proof of your position or you don't. Period.
Separate names with a comma.