Evidence for Man-Made Climate Change Getting Even Stronger

[boedicca]

I thought the concensus already established it as fact? Now the evidence gets stronger?

These are deranged and desperate people.

Concensus does not establish fact, merely that most of the active and leading figures in the field agree upon an established and compellingly supported understanding. Additional supporting evidence enhances and adds support to that understanding, in the same way that it does for every other area of science.

Then why do alarmists constantly point to concensus on AGW and call it a settled debate?

Because AGW is a religion, and the AGW Gods must not be angered lest they persecute us with hot weather and cold weather.

 

[Trakar]

I thought the concensus already established it as fact? Now the evidence gets stronger?

These are deranged and desperate people.

Concensus does not establish fact, merely that most of the active and leading figures in the field agree upon an established and compellingly supported understanding. Additional supporting evidence enhances and adds support to that understanding, in the same way that it does for every other area of science.

Then why do alarmists constantly point to concensus on AGW and call it a settled debate?

I am not aware of any "alarmists" (definition - A person who needlessly alarms or attempts to alarm others, as by inventing or spreading false or exaggerated rumors of impending danger or catastrophe) please cite or reference supporting evidence for such individuals and statements.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Poor Frankie Boy, stuck on stupid. How's that hollow moon doing, old chap?

More real scientific evidence supporting a theory that the Moon is hollow than there is for ManMade Global Warming

How bad does that suck for you?

 

[Trakar]

U.N. + AGW hoax + stupid believers = Quite possible the greatest financial swindle ever to be perpetrated in the history of our planet. Bernie Madoff must be proud.

Please cite and provide reference to the journal published economic and financial analyses of these issues which support your contention.

Your reference does not support your assertion.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Evidence for Man-Made Climate Change Getting Even Stronger

Does this mean the liars and fakers on the side of AGW will stop lying and faking data?

 

[Koios]

LOLZ.


Oh wait, that was a serious article?

LOLZ ^2

Of course not!!! Scientific American is a parody mag, akin to Mad Magazine, and not a true scientific journal such as this ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The fact that 90% of the melting occurred when CO2 levels were below 300 and occurred before the year 1900 isn't significant?

Once again you state this. Once again, show the studies that show this. For you are repeating an obvious lie. 90% of the melting did not occur before 1900. Not for the Arctic Ice, not for the alpine glaciers.

I can see my house, under a mile of ice. Darn that AGW!

 

[boedicca]

Evidence for Man-Made Climate Change Getting Even Stronger

Does this mean the liars and fakers on the side of AGW will stop lying and faking data?

No. It means they'll just keep saying "shut up" louder and more frequently.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

LOLZ.


Oh wait, that was a serious article?

LOLZ ^2

Of course not!!! Scientific American is a parody mag, akin to Mad Magazine, and not a true scientific journal such as this ...

Scientific American is a parody mag

You're right, their standards have really slipped lately.

 

[Koios]

LOLZ.


Oh wait, that was a serious article?

LOLZ ^2

Of course not!!! Scientific American is a parody mag, akin to Mad Magazine, and not a true scientific journal such as this ...

Scientific American is a parody mag

You're right, their standards have really slipped lately.

No doubt disappointing for you, since you exude that of someone who's been consuming Scientific American, cover to cover, for decades.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Good obfuscation, bro.

 

[Koios]

Good obfuscation, bro.

Limbaugh's word of the day, some years back, lives on!!!

Yippee for the righty minions parroting Rush, while not actually understanding where such polysyllabics might be aptly applied.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I have never heard that in a single Rush tune. But Rush sucks so that makes sense.

 

[Koios]

I have never heard that in a single Rush tune. But Rush sucks so that makes sense.

It's a fave of Rush's. But no matter.

Meanwhile, look up 'sarcasm' then see where it applies, unambiguously; then look up 'obfiscate' to see where it doesn't apply.

Just trying to help out.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Obfiscate?

It's a never ending toilet swirl.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's in Scientific American!

Wowzers

 

[Koios]

Obfiscate?

It's a never ending toilet swirl.

Keep working on the first two words. Later we get into "typo." ('u' and 'i' are adjacent keys on qwerty keyboards.)

Oh fuck, more words needing definitions. But a worn dictionary has some value when folks come over and see you spent some time with yours. So there's that upside for ya.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's a new level of Consensus, it's Scientific American Consensus!!!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

90%, Frank. Calm down.

 

[Koios]

It's a new level of Consensus, it's Scientific American Consensus!!!

Try not to confuse the message and messenger. Noodle on that; you might ascend to an IQ in 2 digits.