Millions Evacuated After Catastrophic Flooding Hits China, Pakistan

[Old Rocks]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

 

[jc456]

What is?

Read comp difficulty ?

Your post doesn't make sense. There is water in a desert. They call it an oasis. Snow in a mountain in a drought means what? So explain.

No need, if you weren't ignorant wilfully or otherwise you would not need to ask.

so your answer is you can't explain. Thanks for playing. I love winning.

False! I choose not to explain the obvious.
You, as always have won nothing.
What you have done is reinforce your ignorance.

sure, that's it.

 

[daws101]

Read comp difficulty ?

Your post doesn't make sense. There is water in a desert. They call it an oasis. Snow in a mountain in a drought means what? So explain.

No need, if you weren't ignorant wilfully or otherwise you would not need to ask.

so your answer is you can't explain. Thanks for playing. I love winning.

False! I choose not to explain the obvious.
You, as always have won nothing.
What you have done is reinforce your ignorance.

sure, that's it.

You've done it again.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

 

[jc456]

This is what the American Meteorological Society has to say about extreme weather events in 2014. I am sure that their language would be stronger for 2015, and 2016. Real scientists, not internet pretenders.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-ExplainingExtremeEvents2014.1

Understanding how long-term global change affects the intensity and likelihood of extreme weather events is a frontier science challenge. This fourth edition of explaining extreme events of the previous year (2014) from a climate perspective is the most extensive yet with 33 different research groups exploring the causes of 29 different events that occurred in 2014. A number of this year’s studies indicate that human-caused climate change greatly increased the likelihood and intensity for extreme heat waves in 2014 over various regions. For other types of extreme events, such as droughts, heavy rains, and winter storms, a climate change influence was found in some instances and not in others. This year’s report also included many different types of extreme events. The tropical cyclones that impacted Hawaii were made more likely due to human-caused climate change. Climate change also decreased the Antarctic sea ice extent in 2014 and increased the strength and likelihood of high sea surface temperatures in both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. For western U.S. wildfires, no link to the individual events in 2014 could be detected, but the overall probability of western U.S. wildfires has increased due to human impacts on the climate.

Challenges that attribution assessments face include the often limited observational record and inability of models to reproduce some extreme events well. In general, when attribution assessments fail to find anthropogenic signals this alone does not prove anthropogenic climate change did not influence the event. The failure to find a human fingerprint could be due to insufficient data or poor models and not the absence of anthropogenic effects.

This year researchers also considered other humancaused drivers of extreme events beyond the usual radiative drivers. For example, flooding in the Canadian prairies was found to be more likely because of human land-use changes that affect drainage mechanisms. Similarly, the Jakarta floods may have been compounded by land-use change via urban development and associated land subsidence. These types of mechanical factors reemphasize the various pathways beyond climate change by which human activity can increase regional risk of extreme events.

I like these words....'increased the likelihood' of human-caused climate. Can't get any better than that. Don't even have to read the link. That's all I need. So rock, still haven't seen evidence on how CO2 affects temperature or weather patterns. Where is the scientific verification experiments that show the effects of CO2. Got any? Three and half years now, still waiting. I know, i know, you've provided it. LOL. nope. you have shown that CO2 absorbs and that is all. you can't even show how much it absorbs. ooooooooooops

BTW, since they have to use terms like 'likelihood' means they don't know. kapeesh!!!!

 

[jc456]

Your post doesn't make sense. There is water in a desert. They call it an oasis. Snow in a mountain in a drought means what? So explain.

No need, if you weren't ignorant wilfully or otherwise you would not need to ask.

so your answer is you can't explain. Thanks for playing. I love winning.

False! I choose not to explain the obvious.
You, as always have won nothing.
What you have done is reinforce your ignorance.

sure, that's it.

You've done it again.

I'm glad.

 

[jc456]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

waiting for the list of the thousands of real scientists. got them yet?

 

[daws101]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

Top one is Michael Mann, the tree ring guy.

Bottom one are the ass clowns at MIT pretending to be "scientists"

 

[daws101]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

waiting for the list of the thousands of real scientists. got them yet?

Here's a start.

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus

 

[jc456]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

Top one is Michael Mann, the tree ring guy.

Bottom one are the ass clowns at MIT pretending to be "scientists"

Frank, I found it under a minute.

Shows the lack of internet sourcing these warmers have.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

waiting for the list of the thousands of real scientists. got them yet?

Here's a start.

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus

Consensus is a cult word, not a word used in science

 

[daws101]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

Top one is Michael Mann, the tree ring guy.

Bottom one are the ass clowns at MIT pretending to be "scientists"

Ass clowns?
Jealous much frank?
So because Mann agrees with your position he more qualified to judge?
Lol!

 

[daws101]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

Top one is Michael Mann, the tree ring guy.

Bottom one are the ass clowns at MIT pretending to be "scientists"

Frank, I found it under a minute.

Shows the lack of internet sourcing these warmers have.

Shows your idiocy.
The reason I ask for a link is rwnj's are famous for posting false material to make a point.
Do you want a pat on the head for your Internet search?

 

[daws101]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

waiting for the list of the thousands of real scientists. got them yet?

Here's a start.

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus

Consensus is a cult word, not a word used in science

bullshit.

Scientific consensus is the collective judgment, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of study. Consensus implies general agreement, though not necessarily unanimity.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

Top one is Michael Mann, the tree ring guy.

Bottom one are the ass clowns at MIT pretending to be "scientists"

Ass clowns?
Jealous much frank?
So because Mann agrees with your position he more qualified to judge?
Lol!

Those are the poseurs you pawn off on us as climate "Scientists"

 

[daws101]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

Top one is Michael Mann, the tree ring guy.

Bottom one are the ass clowns at MIT pretending to be "scientists"

Ass clowns?
Jealous much frank?
So because Mann agrees with your position he more qualified to judge?
Lol!

Those are the poseurs you pawn off on us as climate "Scientists"

It's aLL a Crapspiracy! Frank proclaimed!

 

[jc456]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

waiting for the list of the thousands of real scientists. got them yet?

Here's a start.

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus

so show me where the consensus is at. I want to see the statements and who wrote them. Cause I already know Judith Curry helped the APS statement.

here is the link with her explanation: Draft APS Statement on Climate Change

"JC reflections

Well, their paragraph on Climate Science is a rather astonishing take on the APS Workshop. Their paragraph on Climate Change seems to come from the Guardian. Their statement on Climate Action reiterates their rather crazy statement in 2007

Apart from the issue that no one on the POPA seems to understand any of these issues beyond a superficial level (after Koonin and Rosner departed from the POPA), and that their statements are naive and unprofessional, here is my real problem with this. This is an egregious misuse of the expertise of the APS. Their alleged understanding of issues like spectroscopy and fluid dynamics are not of any direct relevance to the issues they write about in this statement. The statement is an embarrassment to the APS."

and

"Well, it will be interesting to see how the APS membership responds. Lets see how this plays out, I will decide whether I renew my APS membership. The Topical Group on the Physics of Climate is developing into something worthwhile, but the POPA obviously doesn’t want any ‘interference’ with its policy agenda.

JC message to APS POPA: no one cares about your political preferences in the climate change debate. You have demonstrated that you bring nothing intellectually to the table (once Koonin and Rosner left). You simply have no business issuing a policy statement on climate change. You have embarrassed the APS membership."

So if indeed, each of these societies behave as APS and there isn't any reason to doubt they don't, I'd say that is all a bunch of whoeee

 

[daws101]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

waiting for the list of the thousands of real scientists. got them yet?

Here's a start.

Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus

so show me where the consensus is at. I want to see the statements and who wrote them. Cause I already know Judith Curry helped the APS statement.

here is the link with her explanation: Draft APS Statement on Climate Change

"JC reflections

Well, their paragraph on Climate Science is a rather astonishing take on the APS Workshop. Their paragraph on Climate Change seems to come from the Guardian. Their statement on Climate Action reiterates their rather crazy statement in 2007

Apart from the issue that no one on the POPA seems to understand any of these issues beyond a superficial level (after Koonin and Rosner departed from the POPA), and that their statements are naive and unprofessional, here is my real problem with this. This is an egregious misuse of the expertise of the APS. Their alleged understanding of issues like spectroscopy and fluid dynamics are not of any direct relevance to the issues they write about in this statement. The statement is an embarrassment to the APS."

and

"Well, it will be interesting to see how the APS membership responds. Lets see how this plays out, I will decide whether I renew my APS membership. The Topical Group on the Physics of Climate is developing into something worthwhile, but the POPA obviously doesn’t want any ‘interference’ with its policy agenda.

JC message to APS POPA: no one cares about your political preferences in the climate change debate. You have demonstrated that you bring nothing intellectually to the table (once Koonin and Rosner left). You simply have no business issuing a policy statement on climate change. You have embarrassed the APS membership."

So if indeed, each of these societies behave as APS and there isn't any reason to doubt they don't, I'd say that is all a bunch of whoeee

Proving once again your willful ignorance!

Climate misinformer: Judith Curry

 

[jc456]

The work of real scientists has less credibility than that of an internet pretender?

LOL @ "real scientists"

Link to either one of those pictures?

Top one is Michael Mann, the tree ring guy.

Bottom one are the ass clowns at MIT pretending to be "scientists"

Frank, I found it under a minute.

Shows the lack of internet sourcing these warmers have.

Shows your idiocy.
The reason I ask for a link is rwnj's are famous for posting false material to make a point.
Do you want a pat on the head for your Internet search?

so you get to decide what site is qualified and what site is not? LOL, who died and left you boss? I'm just saying, you don't get to be that judge. What you should do is provide a source that challenges or debunks the information that is shared rather than make a statement like that. The fact is, you have no idea what any site is doing. So you don't know what site is or isn't legit. You just don't so stop pretending you do. again, the APS statement on climate was debunked by Judith Curry. That's enough to call into question each and every one of those societies you wish to promote. funny eh?