NASA Scientists Embarrassed by AGW...

[flacaltenn]

They recently submitted a signed letter to NASA requesting that the agency abandon their SEVERE position on MAN-MADE global warming.

If denialists didn't suck so badly at science, they wouldn't have to constantly rehash such old propaganda nonsense. They could just talk about science instead.

It's good to be on the rational side. Being that the reality agrees with us, we just have to point to reality to win.

You're quite wrong here.. I normally wouldn't post this kind of stuff.. It was targeted towards a fellow warmer of yours who couldn't seem to reconcile a chart showing 1.2W/m2 of solar INCREASE on the same page as tag line from NASA reminding him that ALL OF THE WARMING is due to man.. NASA speaks --- the tools repeat...

I thought a couple examples of how NASA is abusing their good name and charter might be of interest to that poster...

Or how the MISSION of the IPCC is ONLY to investigate causes of MAN-MADE climate change --- not just climate change.. It's good to remind you guys what your "consensus" is actually made out of....

 

[SillyWabbit]

They recently submitted a signed letter to NASA requesting that the agency abandon their SEVERE position on MAN-MADE global warming.

If denialists didn't suck so badly at science, they wouldn't have to constantly rehash such old propaganda nonsense. They could just talk about science instead.

It's good to be on the rational side. Being that the reality agrees with us, we just have to point to reality to win.

You're quite wrong here.. I normally wouldn't post this kind of stuff.. It was targeted towards a fellow warmer of yours who couldn't seem to reconcile a chart showing 1.2W/m2 of solar INCREASE on the same page as tag line from NASA reminding him that ALL OF THE WARMING is due to man.. NASA speaks --- the tools repeat...

I thought a couple examples of how NASA is abusing their good name and charter might be of interest to that poster...

Or how the MISSION of the IPCC is ONLY to investigate causes of MAN-MADE climate change --- not just climate change.. It's good to remind you guys what your "consensus" is actually made out of....

So, once again, ad infinitum, there's no consensus.



How unusual



Here, have some:

 

[daveman]

Care to match that with all the scientists in the Earth Science disciplines that are directly observing the consequences of AGW?

Until we have academics and institutions that are not paid to FIND A CONNECTION between man-made CO2 and climate change --- then I WILL discount the pre-ordained conclusions of their studies.. Especially when YOU dismiss DOZENS of competent studies showing that the MWPeriod was indeed global for instance..

What is the mission statement for the IPCC for example?? Here --- let me get it for you...

"The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential and options for adaptation and mitigation."

Til that bias and the funding biases are REMOVED _----- you're damn straight ME and the NASA folks in that letter are gonna ignore "your consensus".. Abso-fucking-lutely.

Look at the bright side OldiesRocks... I've given you and Tinkerbelle and Saigon and all of pants-wetting alarmists a whole new list of

"Ignorant, cultist deniers shilling for the oil companies" -- to mock.. Please mock them. And give me a break eh?

Yup, the IPCC tells you straight off what their conclusion is.

That's not how science works. It is, however, how political advocacy works.

AGW cultists can't distinguish between the two.

 

[daveman]

Care to match that with all the scientists in the Earth Science disciplines that are directly observing the consequences of AGW?

Posting stuff from the Weather Channel and saying, "See that?! Manmade global warming!" is not science

From the largest scientific society in the world, the American Institute of Physics;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

You still pulling Tyndall out of your ass?

I showed that his experiment doesn't prove what you claim it does.

Now throw a hissy fit because I don't believe your religion's dogma.

 

[daveman]

From the largest scientific society in the world, the American Institute of Physics;

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

Where's the experimental evidence?

Read the article, dumb ass.

Does the article explain how a small container in an experiment with maybe two variables accurately models an entire planet's atmosphere, oceans, and the nearby star, involving MILLIONS of variables?

Because, you know -- that would be utterly laughable.

 

[daveman]

Did you read the comments section?

Peoplea re attacking these folks as shills for the oil industry essentially.

This is why warmer kooks are funny. it's religion, not science for them.

Oh WAIT... THere's MORE.. I missed the attack on the original website, but I knew I needed a corroborating story about the NASA letter so I went to the HUFFPOST.. They covered the story.. BUT ---- they REMOVED all of the public comments about the story and replaced it with an editorial comment that they were deluged by 100s of glowing comments by skeptics and that ------ (as best I can remember)

: The Huff Post FULLY ENDORSES the concept of Anthropogenic Climate Change and cites the OVERWHELMING consensus of science on the subject. And tho this letter represents a significant list of scientists --- we chose to delete ALL OF THE COMMENTS because we were deluged with skeptics.. ::

Close enough.. You can go read this Stalinistic piece of censorship and purging and read it for yourself.

Don't know whether all that is funny or tragic....

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

 

[daveman]

The thing is, you have to hunt far and wide for a scientist who will state unequivocably that AGW is a problem who does not also receive a substantial chunk of or all of his income to study and report on global warming and its probable causes. This automatically produces a strong motive to find reasons to keep studying AGW and signing on to initiatives to fund it and thereby continue to enrich themselves with our money.

And you have to hunt far and widefor a scientist who does not receive a substantial chunk or all of his income to studyand report on global warming who agrees with the scientists who are promoting 'evidence' for AGW. And it doesn't seem to make a difference whether the group in disagreement with AGW do any work for the oil companies or any other such entities.

We're supposed to follow the money, but only with the skeptics. AGW supporters-for-profit are good and righteous and holy.

As for the oil companies, they are making out like bandits capitalizing on 'green energy' initiatives at taxpayer expense and a lot of this is driving the big prices we are paying at the gas pump. They have almost zero incentive to protest government initiatives to combat global warming and are are highly unlikely to fund studies trying to prove that AGW isn't a problem.

For the life of me, I can't understand those of you who want to agree with only the AGW side of the scientific opinion and thereby almost beg them to take away your freedom, choices, options, and opportunity for what more and more appears to be flawed or bogus science.

For some of them, I think they honestly believe the acolytes won't be burdened with the yoke the infidels will be burdened with. They think they'll be able to keep living their same lifestyle when the Green Nazis stage their revolution.

How about it, Roxy? Are the Green laws going to apply to you?

 

[flacaltenn]

Daveman:

OldieRocks posts that same link 3 times a day and never ONCE has he addressed any of the issues concerning it. It is INDEED a great HISTORY of the CO2 theory for the recent warming.. Unfortunately for him -- it leaves completely UNANSWERED some of the same criticisms of Tyndall and Arhenius that STILL EXIST today. Such as the theory predictions of warming in the upper stratosphere and saturation of the CO2 with water vapor.

O.R. THINKS the issues are resolved with that history piece -- it does nothing of the kind.
I've got 2 Nobel Prize winners in Physics, a former President Emeritas of that SAME AIP org (in O.R's link), and many others that agree with that..

 

[westwall]

Daveman:

OldieRocks posts that same link 3 times a day and never ONCE has he addressed any of the issues concerning it. It is INDEED a great HISTORY of the CO2 theory for the recent warming.. Unfortunately for him -- it leaves completely UNANSWERED some of the same criticisms of Tyndall and Arhenius that STILL EXIST today. Such as the theory predictions of warming in the upper stratosphere and saturation of the CO2 with water vapor.

O.R. THINKS the issues are resolved with that history piece -- it does nothing of the kind.
I've got 2 Nobel Prize winners in Physics, a former President Emeritas of that SAME AIP org (in O.R's link), and many others that agree with that..

The cultists abandoned science a loooong time ago.

 

[daveman]

Daveman:

OldieRocks posts that same link 3 times a day and never ONCE has he addressed any of the issues concerning it. It is INDEED a great HISTORY of the CO2 theory for the recent warming.. Unfortunately for him -- it leaves completely UNANSWERED some of the same criticisms of Tyndall and Arhenius that STILL EXIST today. Such as the theory predictions of warming in the upper stratosphere and saturation of the CO2 with water vapor.

O.R. THINKS the issues are resolved with that history piece -- it does nothing of the kind.
I've got 2 Nobel Prize winners in Physics, a former President Emeritas of that SAME AIP org (in O.R's link), and many others that agree with that..

Roxy is merely performing as programmed. He's incapable of independent thought.