Climate Science’s Myth-Buster
Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
A breath of fresh air.
Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
A breath of fresh air.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No thanksClimate Science’s Myth-Buster
Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
A breath of fresh air.
As is pointed out we have had something like 26 diffrent assurances that certain things such as cities being underwater by such a date that has never materialized it shows that the so called science is far from settled.Climate Science’s Myth-Buster
Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
A breath of fresh air.
“The human factor and carbon dioxide, in particular, contribute to warming, but how much is the subject of intense scientific debate.”
The biggest problem is most people that have fallen for it believe that it is all man made because it is being touted as settled science.Never mind, I bothered.
“The human factor and carbon dioxide, in particular, contribute to warming, but how much is the subject of intense scientific debate.”
So your scientist says exactly what I have been telling you dolts for years. Why am I not surprised? Real scientists do not disagree on whether or not humans play a role. The question is how much of a role do people play?
The biggest problem is most people that have fallen for it believe that it is all man made
Don't pay attention to most on this forum but I can point you to people like AOC, little Swedish Greta and others. If you think that they don't have a following let me remind you of the New Green Deal or being invited to speak in front of congress and the U.N.The biggest problem is most people that have fallen for it believe that it is all man made
Only an unbelievably dumb person would believe that all warming is the product of human activity. I bet you can't point me to one person on this forum that believes that, and we have some seriously stupid motherfuckers floating around in this place.
AOC and others were fixing their make up and passing notes in Science class, so what do you expect?Don't pay attention to most on this forum but I can point you to people like AOC, little Swedish Greta and others. If you think that they don't have a following let me remind you of the New Green Deal or being invited to speak in front of congress and the U.N.The biggest problem is most people that have fallen for it believe that it is all man made
Only an unbelievably dumb person would believe that all warming is the product of human activity. I bet you can't point me to one person on this forum that believes that, and we have some seriously stupid motherfuckers floating around in this place.
While I don't think you can find anyone that does not think that mankind has effect I think you can find many who are convinced that mankind is the reason for every bit of temperature change. Why else are people holding rallies and afraid to have children.
Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
The biggest problem is most people that have fallen for it believe that it is all man made
ALL comments about climate change so far have been based on gut feeling.The biggest problem is most people that have fallen for it believe that it is all man made
110% actually. There would have been slight cooling, without any human activity.
IPCC attribution statements redux: A response to Judith Curry
But then, that's just science. How can it possibly compare to your gut feeling?
No thanksClimate Science’s Myth-Buster
Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
A breath of fresh air.
I'm not going to waste my time finding out, but out of curiosity I wonder if this scientist you're touting right now openly denies the general agreement among scientists regarding AGW, which is that it is happening to some currently unknown extent. Is it simply the case that she agrees with them but found out some things about polar bears that will force a reassessment of the impact on that one species?
Could it be possible that skeptic blogs/websites are once again distorting reality to confuse you armchair scientists?
Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
Curry has been wrong about all her science.
Really? Care to list any published papers she has had to retract? Care to list any credible rebuttals of her work at all?
Didn't think so...
Curry's a scientist, you're not. boom 'Blown up Sir'Should be required reading for skeptics. Must be read closely.
Curry has been wrong about all her science.
To real skeptics, a record of success and failure matters. If someone has failed as consistently as Curry, nobody pays attention to them.