Climate Scientists are Laughing at You

[Billy_Bob]

If you're Spencer link was supposed to provide evidence for your claim in the post before, I failed to locate it. A point out perhaps?

You really are an ignorant fool...

The Greenland Ice Cores disprove your bull shit Crick!

Current swings are far slower and far less than seen in the last 14,000 years.. Your a liar Crick!

 

[SSDD]

Pretty heavy hitters in the climate science world, all right.

Anyway:
Jay H. Lehr

Credentials

• Ph.D., Ground Water Hydrology. University of Arizona (1962). [1]
• Degree in Geological Engineering from Princeton University. [1]

Background
Jay H. Lehr is a Senior Fellow and “Science Director” of the Heartland Institute. He is also a “motivational speaker” and prolific writer. He was editor of “Rational Readings of Environmental Concerns,” which labels environmentalists as “extremists” and “alarmists” among other things. He has testified before Congress numerous times on environmental issues.
Jay H. Lehr

Richard A. Keen

Credentials

• Ph.D., Geography/Climatology, University of Colorado. [1]

Background
Richard A. Keen is instructor emeritus at the University of Colorado Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (ATOC). Some sources have also described him as a “climatologist,” and others as a “meteorologist.”

According to Keen, he has experience as a meteorologist in the army and has “done some climate modeling when I was younger and less wise.” He does not mention receiving any training as a climatologist.
Richard Keen

Stanley B. Goldenberg

Credentials

• M.S. Synoptic Meteorology, Florida State University (1980).
• B.S. Meteorology, Florida State University, (1978).
• A.A., Miami-Dade Community College (1972).

Background
Stanley B. Goldenberg is a Meteorologist with the Hurricane Research Division/AOML/NOAA located in Miami, Florida. He is one of the lead authors of NOAA's Seasonal Hurricane Outlooks for the Atlantic basin.

Goldenberg received his M.S. in Meteorology under the guidance of fellow climate change skeptic Jim O'Brien.

Stanley Goldenberg has been associated with the Heartland Institute as an expert and a regular speaker at the Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change.

Goldenberg is known for his views on arctic sea ice. While Goldenberg has conceded that “it is possible that a small fraction of the increase in hurricane activity might be associated with the gradual, long-term SST increase,” he is also on the record for claiming there is raw data showing an increase in Arctic sea ice depth and an expansion of its coverage. [9], [10]

Tom Harris

Credentials

• B. Eng. , M. Eng. (Mech., thermofluids and energy sciences). [1]

Background
Tom Harris is the Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), a group of climate change skeptics that has received funding from the Heartland Institute. Before starting work with ICSC, Harris was the Executive Director of the now-defunct Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP). [2], [3]

Prior to working with the NRSP, Harris was a Former Director of Operations at the Canadian PR and lobbying firm called the High Park Group (HPG). Previously, Harris was an Associate with APCO Worldwide, a group known for creating The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) which worked to advance tobacco industry interests. [4], [48]

According to Harris's archived profile at APCO Worldwide, “Specifically, he has worked with oil and gas, coal, nuclear, environmental and aerospace clients for whom he has conducted effective media and public relations campaigns.” His profile also highlights how he has “worked with private companies and trade associations to successfully position these entities and their interests with media and before various government committees and regulatory bodies.” [68]

The Heartland Institute describes Harris as “perhaps the most frequently cited and interviewed critic of exaggeration and alarmism in the global warming debate, appearing thousands of times on online news forums and being regularly published in newspapers in Canada and the U.S. and occasionally in Australia, New Zealand, the U.K., and other countries.” [5]

So a mewling ad hom is all you can manage? Any actual rebuttal to what was said? The fact is that it has been warmer than today for 95% of the past 10,000 years. Ice core data, (which is considered to be the gold standard for temperature reconstructions), from both poles show that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present...they also show that the magnitude and rate of change we are seeing today is not even close to the range of natural variability seen over just the past 10,000 years...

And before you start picking cherries and claim that ice cores from the poles say nothing about global temperatures, might I remind you of how often climate science has pointed to warming poles, and told us that the poles are the canaries in the coal mine and where the poles go so goes the rest of the globe....and if you feel that you must still point out that the reconstructions are from the poles, do provide a rational, scientifically valid reason that the poles would show warming spokes very similar to each other while the space between the poles would not...

The fact is that climate science is the guilty party where cherry picking is concerned...opting to look at a very short view of the climate and blame it all on mankind rather than look at the long term and see that what we are seeing today isn't even close to the boundaries of natural variability.

 

[SSDD]

What did they state? They stated that the Earth was warmer during periods long before the existence of human civilization. CNM was correct to characterize their comments as completely irrelevant.

As has been stated here on numerous occasions, the problem is not the absolute temperatures or the absolute CO2 levels we are attaining; it is the RATE at which we are attaining them. CO2 has not risen as rapidly as it is doing at present since the Chicxulub Impact, 66 million years ago, when half the planet was on fire. Nothing in the geological record shows temperature changes taking place anywhere near the present rate. Obviously, the chronological resolution of the record hampers the comparison. But the current warm pulse will last, at minimum, a thousand years. You can go back a very long ways before a thousand year pulse would become invisible in the record.

Then, of course, there is the sixth great extinction, underway now. It seems possible that we may all be starving to death well before the rising seas wash us away.

You keep making that bullshit claim...but when shown the gold standard of temperature reconstructions from both poles, which show that the rate and magnitude of warming we have seen is not even getting close to the boundaries of natural variability, you simply block it out...just as the OP states...and keep making the same bullshit claims over and over...

Ice core temperature reconstructions have the highest resolution of any proxy data and ice cores show greater and faster temperature increases and decreases than anything we have seen...so in order for you to make such claims, you must be looking at the proxy data with the highest resolution..and that data shows exactly the opposite of what you are claiming...proving once again that you just pull bullshit out of your ass and present it as if it were real...but then...bullshit is good enough to fool you..isn't it skid mark?

 

[SSDD]

Nothing in the geological record shows temperature changes taking place anywhere near the present rate.

That is an absolute LIE

Of course it is a lie...but then the skidmark is a liar...he will say anything that he believes will convince anyone that he is right.

 

[SSDD]

^ didnt watch the video, parroting Cult Talking Points

Crusader Frank demonstrates his acumen again. Ffs, you ineducable loon, how would I know they're cherry picking if I didn't watch?

Because you guys have no informed opinion of your own...you simply react as demanded by the opinion given to you by someone with a political agenda...you see anything that challenges your faith and you react in very predictable ways...you invariably begin with some logical fallacy and descend from there...in this instance, you started off with an ad hom and then moved on to another ad hom...then finished off with yet another ad hom and never once addressed the actual topic which you can't, because it is fact that the best temperature reconstructions we have indicate that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present....

 

[SSDD]

why can't you debate it?

What is there to debate? Irrelevant factoids?

What exactly is irrelevant about the fact that most of the past 10,000 years has been warmer than the present?

 

[jc456]

why can't you debate it?

What is there to debate? Irrelevant factoids?

so you don't do facts, as I always said about leftists. And you admit it.

 

[jc456]

If you're Spencer link was supposed to provide evidence for your claim in the post before, I failed to locate it. A point out perhaps?

You really are an ignorant fool...

The Greenland Ice Cores disprove your bull shit Crick!

View attachment 245965

Current swings are far slower and far less than seen in the last 14,000 years.. Your a liar Crick!

Not to mention that the recent core effort at Antarctica shows no warming under the ice. More facts that don't support the warmers. funny shit, still no facts.

 

[jc456]

Pretty heavy hitters in the climate science world, all right.

Anyway:
Jay H. Lehr

Credentials

• Ph.D., Ground Water Hydrology. University of Arizona (1962). [1]
• Degree in Geological Engineering from Princeton University. [1]

Background
Jay H. Lehr is a Senior Fellow and “Science Director” of the Heartland Institute. He is also a “motivational speaker” and prolific writer. He was editor of “Rational Readings of Environmental Concerns,” which labels environmentalists as “extremists” and “alarmists” among other things. He has testified before Congress numerous times on environmental issues.
Jay H. Lehr

Richard A. Keen

Credentials

• Ph.D., Geography/Climatology, University of Colorado. [1]

Background
Richard A. Keen is instructor emeritus at the University of Colorado Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (ATOC). Some sources have also described him as a “climatologist,” and others as a “meteorologist.”

According to Keen, he has experience as a meteorologist in the army and has “done some climate modeling when I was younger and less wise.” He does not mention receiving any training as a climatologist.
Richard Keen

Stanley B. Goldenberg

Credentials

• M.S. Synoptic Meteorology, Florida State University (1980).
• B.S. Meteorology, Florida State University, (1978).
• A.A., Miami-Dade Community College (1972).

Background
Stanley B. Goldenberg is a Meteorologist with the Hurricane Research Division/AOML/NOAA located in Miami, Florida. He is one of the lead authors of NOAA's Seasonal Hurricane Outlooks for the Atlantic basin.

Goldenberg received his M.S. in Meteorology under the guidance of fellow climate change skeptic Jim O'Brien.

Stanley Goldenberg has been associated with the Heartland Institute as an expert and a regular speaker at the Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change.

Goldenberg is known for his views on arctic sea ice. While Goldenberg has conceded that “it is possible that a small fraction of the increase in hurricane activity might be associated with the gradual, long-term SST increase,” he is also on the record for claiming there is raw data showing an increase in Arctic sea ice depth and an expansion of its coverage. [9], [10]

Tom Harris

Credentials

• B. Eng. , M. Eng. (Mech., thermofluids and energy sciences). [1]

Background
Tom Harris is the Executive Director of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), a group of climate change skeptics that has received funding from the Heartland Institute. Before starting work with ICSC, Harris was the Executive Director of the now-defunct Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP). [2], [3]

Prior to working with the NRSP, Harris was a Former Director of Operations at the Canadian PR and lobbying firm called the High Park Group (HPG). Previously, Harris was an Associate with APCO Worldwide, a group known for creating The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) which worked to advance tobacco industry interests. [4], [48]

According to Harris's archived profile at APCO Worldwide, “Specifically, he has worked with oil and gas, coal, nuclear, environmental and aerospace clients for whom he has conducted effective media and public relations campaigns.” His profile also highlights how he has “worked with private companies and trade associations to successfully position these entities and their interests with media and before various government committees and regulatory bodies.” [68]

The Heartland Institute describes Harris as “perhaps the most frequently cited and interviewed critic of exaggeration and alarmism in the global warming debate, appearing thousands of times on online news forums and being regularly published in newspapers in Canada and the U.S. and occasionally in Australia, New Zealand, the U.K., and other countries.” [5]

So a mewling ad hom is all you can manage? Any actual rebuttal to what was said? The fact is that it has been warmer than today for 95% of the past 10,000 years. Ice core data, (which is considered to be the gold standard for temperature reconstructions), from both poles show that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present...they also show that the magnitude and rate of change we are seeing today is not even close to the range of natural variability seen over just the past 10,000 years...

And before you start picking cherries and claim that ice cores from the poles say nothing about global temperatures, might I remind you of how often climate science has pointed to warming poles, and told us that the poles are the canaries in the coal mine and where the poles go so goes the rest of the globe....and if you feel that you must still point out that the reconstructions are from the poles, do provide a rational, scientifically valid reason that the poles would show warming spokes very similar to each other while the space between the poles would not...

The fact is that climate science is the guilty party where cherry picking is concerned...opting to look at a very short view of the climate and blame it all on mankind rather than look at the long term and see that what we are seeing today isn't even close to the boundaries of natural variability.

just read my post #28.The antarctic trumps their fking claim. It isn't warmer under the ice there. So, there is no warming in Antarctica.

 

[mamooth]

Why are they holding a meeting in a "carbon polluted" room?? If CO2 is a pollutant because it's a GHouse gas, than certainly so also is water vapor.. Where's the Water Vapor Tax in the Green Old Deal???

That illustrates is why deniers, and conservatives in general, shouldn't try sarcasm. They're just so very bad at it.

To be funny, satire has to be connected to reality. That wasn't. It was only connected to the alternate reality of the denier retard dimension. Thus, to normal people, it came across as stupid and whiny.

 

[cnm]

because it is fact that the best temperature reconstructions we have indicate that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present....

I love the hilarity of local data being extrapolated to global data. Also the misrepresentation of 'present'.

 

[jc456]

because it is fact that the best temperature reconstructions we have indicate that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present....

I love the hilarity of local data being extrapolated to global data.

Then why do you warmers use arctic data?

 

[SSDD]

because it is fact that the best temperature reconstructions we have indicate that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present....

I love the hilarity of local data being extrapolated to global data. Also the misrepresentation of 'present'.

Got a rational explanation for both the arctic and the antarctic showing the same temperature spikes and drops over the past 10K years and the land between the two poles not experiencing the same temperature variations?

And again...how many times has climate science told us that the poles are the canaries in the coal mine...that what happens in in the arctic and antarctic is just the prelude to what happens in the rest of the world? Were they lying?

Do you have any argument or is logical fallacy all you have?

 

[tycho1572]

Climate change has been happening over the past millions of years. The only difference now are the idiots who think it can be stopped.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I love the smell of the Heartland Institute in the morning, it smells like....cherry picking.

Gee, all you did was complain about alleged cherry picking in the video, you actually destroyed your own reply since their "cherry picking" video is better than your fact less, evidence free reply.

It has been SIX days since thread started not a single cogent answer to the video has been posted, when are you guys going to post one?

 

[skookerasbil]

Climate scientists are largely irrelevant when I comes down to it. The shit they work on has almost no impact outside their field of study.....think about it. Where has the science transcended beyond the research? The answer is.....nowhere!

 

[SSDD]

I love the smell of the Heartland Institute in the morning, it smells like....cherry picking.

Gee, all you did was complain about alleged cherry picking in the video, you actually destroyed your own reply since their "cherry picking" video is better than your fact less, evidence free reply.

It has been SIX days since thread started not a single cogent answer to the video has been posted, when are you guys going to post one?

You don't really expect one do you?

 

[flacaltenn]

Why are they holding a meeting in a "carbon polluted" room?? If CO2 is a pollutant because it's a GHouse gas, than certainly so also is water vapor.. Where's the Water Vapor Tax in the Green Old Deal???

That illustrates is why deniers, and conservatives in general, shouldn't try sarcasm. They're just so very bad at it.

To be funny, satire has to be connected to reality. That wasn't. It was only connected to the alternate reality of the denier retard dimension. Thus, to normal people, it came across as stupid and whiny.

Of course it was funny.. But more importantly it gave you this opportunity to do parade out your worn and tired ad homs.. Lighten up Kathy... Water Vapor is in the same class of gases you rabid religious freaks have labeled as "pollutants"..

That's fucking hysterical... Are you scared of DiHydrous Monoxide???

Here's how you do water vapor satire chief...

Facts About Dihydrogen Monoxide

 

[cnm]

It has been SIX days since thread started not a single cogent answer to the video has been posted, when are you guys going to post one?

I think we've all laughed at it, haven't we?

 

[cnm]

Do you have any argument or is logical fallacy all you have?

What date is 'the present' to which 10,000 years is compared?