GlobalClimateWarmerCoolering Appears to have Stalled.

[Midnight Marauder]

Who said anything about Hayek?

Forget to take your Ritalin, or something?

I think were getting closer to a diagnosis... you also exhibit the inability to understand a comparison of your reading comprehension based on previous failure...

I have a diagnosis...you have a severe case of stupidity...

Physician, heal thyself!

 

[Oddball]

Who said anything about Hayek?

Forget to take your Ritalin, or something?

I think were getting closer to a diagnosis... you also exhibit the inability to understand a comparison of your reading comprehension based on previous failure...

I have a diagnosis...you have a severe case of stupidity...

And you exhibit a failure to stay on topic.

But if derailment, projections and ad hominems are all you can muster.....

 

[Liability]

Let's see... who am I going to take seriously on this subject? -

A. some poster on a message board.
B. over 90% of the worlds credible scientists

it's a tough choice folks.... but I think I'm going with choice B.

Well, let's see. Since YOU just make your figures up -- apparently out of thin air -- there isn't even a question about whether to take your shit seriously.

Of course not.

Fuckin' dumbass Canucks with their unsupported and made-up figures are just not reliable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Discovery of huge ancient cities in the waters off of Okinawa « OkinawaTime

These undersea ruins off Okinawa are readily explainable because:

1. They were built quite recently by Aquaman

b. Earth was in Balance until the Reagan Administration and he used a RayGun to submerge these cities because he thought Japan was our enemy

III. This particular city like many, many, many others throughout the world were built over 18,000 years ago before the recent and temporary warming trend.

 

[mdn2000]

Scientific opinion on climate change and global warming

SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT FOR HUMAN-CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE
Environmental groups have warned of the contribution to climate change from human activities for decades. It has taken the scientific community many years to begin making definitive statements about the accuracy of these claims. It should be noted that while the overwhelming majority of scientists now accept that human activities are a major cause of global warming, there is still a small number of scientists who disagree with these conclusions.



evidence supporting global warming & human causes
The fact that carbon dioxide absorbs and emits IR radiation has been known for over a century. The recent rise in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is greater than any in hundreds of thousands of years and this is human-caused.


The historical temperature record shows a rise of 0.4–0.8 °C over the last 100 years, and the current warmth is unusual in the past 1000 years. Climate change attribution studies using both models and observations find that the warming of the last 50 years is likely caused by human activity. Natural variability (including solar variation) alone cannot explain the recent change. Climate models can reproduce the observed trend only when greenhouse gas forcing is included.

is a scientific consensus behind all of the above, reflected in official statements by professional associations related to climate science


Climate models predict more warming, and other climate effects such as sea level rise, more frequent and severe storms, drought and heat waves in the future.

What an easy post to destroy, you people pay attention, you let an idiot get away with this post and have not effectively addressed this.

One, the guy is just using links, press releases, articles and propaganda nothing more.

Where is the education and intelligence, can this nut job only point to others work and say look-see, this is not debate, its obfuscation.

He gave us a link. I followed the link, it takes you to the IPCC, the ultra secret IPCC, ever see an IPCC report in full, nope, its all top secret, ever see a list of names of IPCC scientist, nope, why wont the scientist allow their names to be associated with the IPCC, simple, credibility, scientist actually do tell the truth and the IPCC does not.

So produce a report not a link to articles simply stating, "the sky is falling, we all agree".

Debate with your education, provide a proven fact not a theory.

Environmental groups have warned of the contribution to climate change from human activities for decades. It has taken the scientific community many years to begin making definitive statements about the accuracy of these claims.

Interesting, the environuts made an unsubstantiated claim than paid scientist money to "back-fit" the data to support the claims, this has cost billions of dollars and years, apon years to do. How did the environuts no CO2 was a man made danger before the scientist.

Definitive statements about the accuracy of claims, what are these definitive statements, they could be anything, no statement is given, its up to the reader imagination to decide, the definitive statement is "nobody has an answer because the data is too complex to prove the accuracy of the environuts claims", this is definitive and all scientist agree, that is the consensus.

The fact that carbon dioxide absorbs and emits IR radiation

Absolutely true, create heat and CO2 will emit it as fast as its absord and created, CO2 just as easily absorbs the opposite of heat, cold, Its a scientific fact that CO2 is best at storing coldness, not heat, heat by CO2 is emitted immeadiately, Cold is stored by CO2 and released slowly in comparison to heat. This is why it takes billions of dollars to try and prove otherwise.

models and observations find that the warming of the last 50 years is likely caused by human activity

Why are scientist and technical writers of this subject careful to use the word "likely", simple, they must, there is no proof.

Climate models can reproduce the observed trend only when greenhouse gas forcing is included.

Climate models are programs written by programers to attain a desired result for scientist. Lets see a report, a real report and not an aritcle and we will all see scientist admit they must make up facts because of the lack of data, the scientist admit they must make millions of manipulations to get the desired result. Scientists admit they do not have computers powerful to handle all the data and parameters.

lets see a report, not an article, its not scientific to debate an article.

There is a scientific consensus behind all of the above, reflected in official statements by professional associations related to climate science

Here is the kicker, this article states the scientific consensus is made by professional associations, it does not say a consenses by scientist.

Climate models predict

Predict, thats all, I predict the same and I am right because the historic record shows that everything predict occurs on a regular basis.

I will make a prediction about tomorrow based on my SimCity 4 simulation, the sun will rise tomorrow, some places will be hot, some places will be could, it will rain in other places and only be cloudy in others. Think I am wrong, bet me. My one year prediction is there will be record highs and record lows in which we can use to come up with an average.

There is a scientific consensus behind all of the above, reflected in official statements by professional associations related to climate science

Here is the kicker, this article states the scientific consensus is made by professional associations, it does not say a consenses by scientist.

Pay attention to whats posted if you want to easily destroy a moron's post. Over and over whats posted is cherry picked or contains the information that reveals facts that disprove a global warming crisis.

Either way, I say we are causing the earth to warm and its green energy causing it, green energy is an oxymoron, production of green energy power plants creates billions of tons of CO2 that has increased at an extreme rate in the last two years. The green energy industry is now dumping the CO2 into the atmosphere faster than any time in our history, if they are right they will prove it even if they must destroy the earth to do it.

 

[Oddball]

We didn't let Jay Canschmuck get away with anything...We ignored his "evidence" as the cherry picked partisan hackery that it is.

But thanks for dissecting the link anyways.

 

[KittenKoder]

Oh goody! - more science being interpreted by scientists for us on the board.

Yes. We know not to listen to any un-ordained preachers of any religion.

do you mean like "scientists" who get paid by oil companies for favorable findings?

Who pays the scientists that interpret the data the way you like?

 

[Jay Canuck]

It should be noted that while the overwhelming majority of scientists now accept that human activities are a major cause of global warming, there is still a small number of scientists who disagree with these conclusions.



but not according to MD2000 and his opinion.

 

[KittenKoder]

It should be noted that while the overwhelming majority of scientists now accept that human activities are a major cause of global warming, there is still a small number of scientists who disagree with these conclusions.



but not according to MD2000 and his opinion.

Only in the scientific pool of the peer pressured ones you like ... in the real worlds a majority do not agree with it.

 

[Jay Canuck]

another scientist weighs in.....whoa!

 

[Screaming Eagle]

It should be noted that while the overwhelming majority of scientists now accept that human activities are a major cause of global warming, there is still a small number of scientists who disagree with these conclusions.



but not according to MD2000 and his opinion.

How can human activities be causing something which does not exist. The Earth is not getting warmer.

 

[Bfgrn]

Who said anything about Hayek?

Forget to take your Ritalin, or something?

I think were getting closer to a diagnosis... you also exhibit the inability to understand a comparison of your reading comprehension based on previous failure...

I have a diagnosis...you have a severe case of stupidity...

And you exhibit a failure to stay on topic.

But if derailment, projections and ad hominems are all you can muster.....

The current topic is reading comprehension of the article you posted...

The centerpiece of your argument is Mojib Latif...yet you don't even understand WHAT Mojib Latif is saying...


Of Moles and Whacking: “Mojib Latif predicted two decades of cooling” « The Way Things Break
Latif is saying that because people don’t understand that global warming isn’t supposed to be monotonic, and that there could be periods where temperatures pause or even dip below the present, the media and/or public will incorrectly believe that global warming has stopped/was wrong/etc. even though such “pauses” in warming are decidedly not contrary to our understanding of the climate system and how we anticipate it will respond to emissions driven warming.

 

[Oddball]

It should be noted that while the overwhelming majority of scientists now accept that human activities are a major cause of global warming, there is still a small number of scientists who disagree with these conclusions.



but not according to MD2000 and his opinion.

How can human activities be causing something which does not exist. The Earth is not getting warmer.

I'll tell you why, because damn near EVERYTHING can be blamed on anthropogenic GlobalClimateWarmerCoolering!

warmlist

And since blog postings seem to be all the rage as "proof", here's a rather amusing recent post, from Heritage:

Global Warming Ate My Homework: 100 Things Blamed on Global Warming » The Foundry

 

[mdn2000]

It should be noted that while the overwhelming majority of scientists now accept that human activities are a major cause of global warming, there is still a small number of scientists who disagree with these conclusion

There is a scientific consensus behind all of the above, reflected in official statements by professional associations related to climate science

Here is the kicker, this article states the scientific consensus is made by professional associations, it does not say a consenses by scientist.

Okay Cancuk, you have stated your opinion as to what you beleive so why did you post a source that states the consenses is amongst professional enviroment associations, not the scientist.

Canuck, your source is stating the opposite what you beleive.

 

[Jay Canuck]

so the act of putting the consensus of scientists together for publication in a report nullifys their consensus? -
nice try with the word games buddy..... once again I will stick with science.

 

[KittenKoder]

another scientist weighs in.....whoa!

Who pays the "scientists" who say what you want to hear?

 

[KittenKoder]

so the act of putting the consensus of scientists together for publication in a report nullifys their consensus? -
nice try with the word games buddy..... once again I will stick with science.

Look up and study the meaning of the word "consensus" ...


Hint: It doesn't mean fact nor does it mean right.

American Idol is a consensus of what good singing is.

 

[Jay Canuck]

hey my son did a report on Einstein the other day but unfortunately Einstein didn't write the report so everthing in the report is wrong including Einsteins own work.

( the above is an example of sarcasm)

 

[KittenKoder]

hey my son did a report on Einstein the other day but unfortunately Einstein didn't write the report so everthing in the report is wrong including Einsteins own work.

Einstein was also not part of a consensus ... hell, Columbus was completely against the consensus ... yet both proved more accurate than the consensus.

 

[Bfgrn]

another scientist weighs in.....whoa!

Who pays the "scientists" who say what you want to hear?

The PEA brain climate change deniers mantra...

THIS is WHO funds the experts we should trust ...

And...THESE are the experts we should listen to ...