I didn't think anything...The United States Navy proved it with actual verifiable evidence, rather than faked data from phantom reporting stations.
You lose, Buckwheat.
You lose, Buckwheat.
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.
Do they have $900 million submarines and scores of crew to lose if they're wrong....or lying?
Do they have $900 million submarines and scores of crew to lose if they're wrong....or lying?
Put on hold, as the forcing of AGW are far greater than the forcing of the Milankovic Cycles.
If that is so why isn't there widespread and incontrovertible evidence of warming? If what you say is true then we should have allready risen to the temperature levels that were last seen in the MWP.
You sir are hoist on your own petard.
What a fucking idiot you prove yourself to be everytime you post. Even the denialists like Limpbaugh finally had to admit that there is widespread proof that it is warming. He just denies that we have anything to do with it.
As for you, you do not know from day to day what you think. Come on, Faux Geologist, have you never heard of glaciers or ice caps?
Here's a movie of the melting ice cap....
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure6.mov
Here's a movie of the melting ice cap....
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure6.mov
I see it is all taken at the end of the summer. I also noticed that there was a lot of movement of the ice but the detail of the animation is not high enough to actually see anything relevant. The ice could either be melting or it could just be being blown around.
The detail is not good enough to tell either way.
Here's a movie of the melting ice cap....
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure6.mov
I see it is all taken at the end of the summer. I also noticed that there was a lot of movement of the ice but the detail of the animation is not high enough to actually see anything relevant. The ice could either be melting or it could just be being blown around.
The detail is not good enough to tell either way.
You are just a flat out liar.
Are you employed by the American Petroleum Institute?
I see it is all taken at the end of the summer. I also noticed that there was a lot of movement of the ice but the detail of the animation is not high enough to actually see anything relevant. The ice could either be melting or it could just be being blown around.
The detail is not good enough to tell either way.
You are just a flat out liar.
Are you employed by the American Petroleum Institute?
Are you confident enough yet in the power of an additional 200PPM of additional CO2 that you can show us in a laboratory setting how it raises temperatures by degrees and melts ice?
You are just a flat out liar.
Are you employed by the American Petroleum Institute?
Are you confident enough yet in the power of an additional 200PPM of additional CO2 that you can show us in a laboratory setting how it raises temperatures by degrees and melts ice?
The science was proven in 1859.
You really need to do a little research outside of right wing blogs.
MIT: Climate change odds much worse than thought
New analysis shows warming could be double previous estimates
CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--The most comprehensive modeling yet carried out on the likelihood of how much hotter the Earth's climate will get in this century shows that without rapid and massive action, the problem will be about twice as severe as previously estimated six years ago and could be even worse than that.
The study uses the MIT Integrated Global Systems Model, a detailed computer simulation of global economic activity and climate processes that has been developed and refined by the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change since the early 1990s. The new research involved 400 runs of the model with each run using slight variations in input parameters, selected so that each run has about an equal probability of being correct based on present observations and knowledge. Other research groups have estimated the probabilities of various outcomes, based on variations in the physical response of the climate system itself. But the MIT model is the only one that interactively includes detailed treatment of possible changes in human activities as well such as the degree of economic growth, with its associated energy use, in different countries.
Study co-author Ronald Prinn, the co-director of the Joint Program and director of MIT's Center for Global Change Science, says that, regarding global warming, it is important "to base our opinions and policies on the peer-reviewed science," he says. And in the peer-reviewed literature, the MIT model, unlike any other, looks in great detail at the effects of economic activity coupled with the effects of atmospheric, oceanic and biological systems. "In that sense, our work is unique," he says.
The new projections, published this month in the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate, indicate a median probability of surface warming of 5.2 degrees Celsius by 2100, with a 90% probability range of 3.5 to 7.4 degrees.
MIT: Climate change odds much worse than thought
You are just a flat out liar.
Are you employed by the American Petroleum Institute?
Are you confident enough yet in the power of an additional 200PPM of additional CO2 that you can show us in a laboratory setting how it raises temperatures by degrees and melts ice?
The science was proven in 1859.
You really need to do a little research outside of right wing blogs.
Here's a movie of the melting ice cap....
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20091005_Figure6.mov
I see it is all taken at the end of the summer. I also noticed that there was a lot of movement of the ice but the detail of the animation is not high enough to actually see anything relevant. The ice could either be melting or it could just be being blown around.
The detail is not good enough to tell either way.
You are just a flat out liar.
Are you employed by the American Petroleum Institute?
Check out those goofy Wright boys!Are you confident enough yet in the power of an additional 200PPM of additional CO2 that you can show us in a laboratory setting how it raises temperatures by degrees and melts ice?
The science was proven in 1859.
You really need to do a little research outside of right wing blogs.
You know for someone who claims that every sceptic is a luddite you and your fellow cultists are the ones who can't seem to understand that science methodologies have really improved from way back then. Imagine that. Back then some people actually thought that you couldn't travel faster than a galloping horse.
You know for someone who claims that every sceptic is a luddite you and your fellow cultists are the ones who can't seem to understand that science methodologies have really improved from way back then. Imagine that. Back then some people actually thought that you couldn't travel faster than a galloping horse.