England Court PROVES "climate change" is a FARCE

[CowboyTed]

We who were young in the 70's knew it was a hoax by Gore.
Now there is more than enough proof that everything he has predicted is false.

What proof? You have a few mistakes in a single movie made for the masses...

Where is your actual scientific evidence...

Three Facts Prove Climate Alarm Is a Scam

World's top climate scientists confess: Global warming is just QUARTER what we thought - and computers got the effects of greenhouse gases wrong | Daily Mail Online

First one written by a guy who is qualified in space architecture at the University of Houston.

First statement is highly cherry picked data or a lie, as I have shown before.

Second is just pointing and saying they didn't exactly predict the world (they work probability) so they are wrong, again no actual evidence from him.

Third no fact conspiracy theory...


the second link is from the Daily Mail, I know journalists from there and the freely agree they make up shit to sell to idiots...

Is this the best you got... Next time please use credible sources as answering bullshit is just tiresome...

 

[CowboyTed]

The indisputable evidence that "Global Warming" is a scam literally piles up to the heavens now. Each one is a bigger bombshell than the previous one. The truth always comes out in the end...

A new peer-reviewed study by scientists and a statistician claims to reveal that “nearly all” of the warming shown in current temperature datasets from NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Met Office in the United Kingdom are the result of adjustments made to the datasets after temperatures were recorded, calling into question just how much warming is real and how much is pure fantasy.

That's right...a peer-reviewed study shows that the only "cause" of "Global Warming" are scientists. Scientists who falsify their data to make it appear as though "Global Warming" actually exists.

‘Bombshell’ climate-change study could totally dismantle the claim humans are causing global warming

Slight correction.
It was political scientists who doctored graph charts and claimed global warming.
They get paid by the government grants for research around the world in the college universities.
The real scientists were always saying they needed more data.

BOMBSHELL: This article gets drudged up every few months and dismissed every few months...

ANYTHING NEW????

 

[toobfreak]

You have no actual evidence for your second line... It is just shit you are making up.

I DON'T NEED TO MAKE ANYTHING UP, TED! I am just using YOUR OWN DATA you kindly provided, that you obviously want to ignore now when it does not suit you! Let us take a closer look:

The LAST THREE SEGMENTS of your data show a change. A deviation from a previously DEAD FLAT line going back to 1960. So obviously something is having an effect, WITHOUT the Paris accord, WITHOUT abandoning coal, and the rate of change (delta t) INCREASES with each segment! Look closely above, the evidence is undeniable. I was being conservative in plotting off the angle of just the LAST segment and not even considering the RATE OF CHANGE. Just the last segment if nothing else changes, takes us to the conclusions I gave. THAT IS LOGIC, Ted, the basis of science. As a scientist, I know. That is the most conservative conclusion possible from the data you gave. And like I said, if they enact the Paris Accord with or without us, that has to help. As new technologies become practical which are greener, a certainty, that has to help. So my second line of 3350 is not only supported by your data, but the conclusion that it could be and should be even better than that. That is the inevitable result of Modus Ponens, the beginning and foundation of all logical thought.

HOWEVER, if we take into account the RATE OF CHANGE implied in these last three segments, then that would generate a curved line. No one can say what curve that line might be, but I've drawn one very reasonable one from your data, that follows quite naturally from the established data. What I have done here is not arbitrary, but not dissimilar to how they forecast the path a hurricane might take. PROBLEM IS, Ted, since we have never tried this with the Earth before, NO ONE CAN SAY HARD AND FAST what the actual limits of the curve might be! So in climate study regarding global warming, we can basically only guess. WE HAVE NO OTHER PLANETS ON WHICH TO CONDUCT PRIOR EXPERIMENTS.

That curve suggests we have reached a bottom of sorts, and who knows, may be turning the corner and in another few decades, sea ice might be right back up where it started! Even you cannot say that is not possible. But your data shows that efforts already made are having a definite effect, and the results are likely to continue and improve. Therefore, it is nearly impossible that all ice will melt and be gone by 2100. That is the science derived from your own data.

And that is all still before other factors such as environmental accords or improved technology are applied. And we still need to go back thousands and millions of years and look at long term cycles. This could all be part of a very long term cycle part of the Earth orbit or solar cycle that combined with our activity is causing this.

BOTTOM LINE: it is BECAUSE I am a scientist that I am not willing to jump to any rash conclusions based on what you have shown here. Just as easily as you predict the end of the world, I can look at the same dataset and quite rightly and fairly conclude that with no further changes, we have staved off the worst of the ice melt and are on the way of getting back to 1960 standards.

 

[toobfreak]

NOW TED,

I don't want you to think my data is "full of shit," that I am "making it up" or that I have "no evidence," so I only used YOUR data and YOUR evidence. Let us look at the FOUR MOST RECENT measurements in your own graph you gave us in post 596; please feel free to enlarge it, examine what I did closely, even REPEAT THE MEASUREMENTS YOURSELF.

SEGMENT 1 shows a continuation of the previous trend.
SEGMENT 2 shows a deviation.
SEGMENT 3 shows a continued rate of change.
SEGMENT 4 shows a now more than DOUBLING of the rate of change!

That represents about a 900% improved reduction in the rate of ice loss compared to segment 1.

If we do nothing further, segment 4 takes us to the year 3350 as I said before. That is 1,300 years to solve the climate dilemma. If we project that rate of change to even just ONE MORE SEGMENT, it would indicate a better-than 4 o'clock position angle and a radical improvement in the future of our climate! And that is without doing a damned thing beyond what we are already doing today.

So you tell me, how do you argue with your own data? If you disagree with my conclusions, then you are disagreeing with your own data.

 

[P@triot]

Study: Earth cooler now than when Al Gore won Nobel Peace Prize for global warming work

 

[Political Junky]

Study: Earth cooler now than when Al Gore won Nobel Peace Prize for global warming work

More Nazi bullshit.

 

[bripat9643]

Study: Earth cooler now than when Al Gore won Nobel Peace Prize for global warming work

More Nazi bullshit.

What does pointing out a fact have to do with Nazis?

 

[hazlnut]

While the left's leaders continue to LIE about "Climate Change" for power & control (and the left's subservient sheep continue to be willfully ignorant puppets refusing to question anything) - a court in England has now proven that the entire "climate change" issue is a farce.

Al Gore's people - when under oath before a court and facing perjury - were forced to admit that their data and claims in the movie were so false, they submitted 77 pages of correction to the court.

I'm going to repeat that: 77 pages worth of corrections to their movie.

Al Gore’s spokesman and “environment advisor,” Ms. Kalee Kreider, begins by saying that the film presented “thousands and thousands of facts.” It did not: just 2,000 “facts” in 93 minutes would have been one fact every three seconds. The film contained only a few dozen points, most of which will be seen to have been substantially inaccurate. The judge concentrated only on nine points which even the UK Government, to which Gore is a climate-change advisor, had to admit did not represent mainstream scientific opinion.

Ms. Kreider then states, incorrectly, that the judge himself had never used the term “errors.” In fact, the judge used the term “errors,” in inverted commas, throughout his judgment.

Couple Al Gore's people being forced to admit all of their lies with under penalty of perjury with the not one, but TWO different rounds of "Climate Gate" and the fact that the left predicted the polar ice caps would be melted by 2013 when in fact they have now expanded by 60% and, well, only an idiot libtard could ignore all of this indisputable concrete evidence in favor of their masters propaganda.

35 Inconvenient Truths: The errors in Al Gore?s movie | Monckton

Global cooling: Arctic ice caps grows by 60% against global warming predictions | Mail Online

Climate Gate News and Video - FOX News Topics - FOXNews.com

You just keep on, keepin' on Sparky.

 

[Rustic]

No such thing as "man made" global warming/cooling... its it's arrogant and childish think such a thing.

 

[Redfish]

No such thing as "man made" global warming/cooling... its it's arrogant and childish think such a thing.

correct. but the AGW religious zealots will never accept that fact.

I will never understand why they cannot take on man made pollution (a real problem) without creating a fake link between pollution and climate.

Can one of our resident gore worshipers explain?

 

[P@triot]

I’m so thankful for the people who keep working to expose the liberal lies...

Delingpole: Now 400 Scientific Papers in 2017 Say 'Global Warming' Is a Myth

 

[Political Junky]

I’m so thankful for the people who keep working to expose the liberal lies...

Delingpole: Now 400 Scientific Papers in 2017 Say 'Global Warming' Is a Myth

Ohhh, Breitbart. Lots of credibility there.

 

[P@triot]

I’m so thankful for the people who keep working to expose the liberal lies...

Delingpole: Now 400 Scientific Papers in 2017 Say 'Global Warming' Is a Myth

Ohhh, Breitbart. Lots of credibility there.

The 400 scientific papers are certainly credible!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Yeah, because people that can do math and science are all liberals and people that can't do math and science are moronic conservatives like you, you inbred highschool dropout.

So, your argument is that there were, in essence, no polar caps, and they increased by a percentage, but because there was pretty much zero ice, that increase is insignificant?

At the height of Al Gore's ManBearPig mania, how far had the polar caps contracted? You sound like you know the topic well. Why don't you show us just how much ice has returned.

And, to the real point, doesn't that mean that there is no warming problem now, regardless of how much ice is there? Increasing ice, no matter how little, is evidence of cooling. not warming...

which means it is all a bunch of cocksucking bullshit made up by the communist left to overthrow all forms of capitalism, isn't it, you goose-stepping pinko twat?

 

[P@triot]

Here is a PhD who holds 4 degrees from M.I.T.



(The funny thing is...Glenn Beck explained all of this more than 8 years ago)

 

[cnm]

What is it that you don't get?

What planet you're on. It can't be one with these Arctic Ice records.

 

[cnm]

(The funny thing is...Glenn Beck explained all of this more than 8 years ago)

One can only agree that would be hilarious.

 

[Redfish]

(The funny thing is...Glenn Beck explained all of this more than 8 years ago)

One can only agree that would be hilarious.

Beck has lost his mind, but on this he was right.

 

[Rustic]

The belief that there is man made climate change is just another way for the collective to control the individual.

The intentions are always bad...

 

[P@triot]

(The funny thing is...Glenn Beck explained all of this more than 8 years ago)

One can only agree that would be hilarious.

Beck has lost his mind, but on this he was right.

I agree on BOTH counts.