The IPCC begins to unravel...

[westwall]

It seems that one of the non laymen might agree with the masses as well. Sorry for the slap old fraud but well I am sure you'll dredge up some nonsense claiming he's a neoconsatanworshippingnraguntotinfalsecredentialednonscientistintobestiality soon.


Global warming: Interview with John Christy--Models, sensitivity, the PNAS paper and more

 

[konradv]

It seems that one of the non laymen might agree with the masses as well. Sorry for the slap old fraud but well I am sure you'll dredge up some nonsense claiming he's a neoconsatanworshippingnraguntotinfalsecredentialednonscientistintobestiality soon.


Global warming: Interview with John Christy--Models, sensitivity, the PNAS paper and more

His objections seem to be about time course, not basic science. I'm sure he'd agree there'd be warming, if CO2 doubled from a recent historical average of 300 ppm to 600.

 

[Annie]

It seems that one of the non laymen might agree with the masses as well. Sorry for the slap old fraud but well I am sure you'll dredge up some nonsense claiming he's a neoconsatanworshippingnraguntotinfalsecredentialednonscientistintobestiality soon.


Global warming: Interview with John Christy--Models, sensitivity, the PNAS paper and more

His objections seem to be about time course, not basic science. I'm sure he'd agree there'd be warming, if CO2 doubled from a recent historical average of 300 ppm to 600.

Actually he's warning about the reliance on models that are not only unproven, but based upon 'evidence' that has already been admitted unverifiable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Pioneer Anomaly demonstrates that we might not have quite the grasp on a fundamental, measurable concept like gravity. So the idea Warmers have a handle on their "Science" is laughable. We have consensus! LOL

They ignore changes in far more powerful GHG's (water vapor), they ignore their own history which shows a lag between warming and CO2 and in that order, but they keep repeating the same implausible notion that barely perceptible changes in a single molecule cause instantaneous changes in the climate.

 

[westwall]

It seems that one of the non laymen might agree with the masses as well. Sorry for the slap old fraud but well I am sure you'll dredge up some nonsense claiming he's a neoconsatanworshippingnraguntotinfalsecredentialednonscientistintobestiality soon.


Global warming: Interview with John Christy--Models, sensitivity, the PNAS paper and more

His objections seem to be about time course, not basic science. I'm sure he'd agree there'd be warming, if CO2 doubled from a recent historical average of 300 ppm to 600.

You need to read it again konrad.

 

[Big Fitz]

It seems that one of the non laymen might agree with the masses as well. Sorry for the slap old fraud but well I am sure you'll dredge up some nonsense claiming he's a neoconsatanworshippingnraguntotinfalsecredentialednonscientistintobestiality soon.


Global warming: Interview with John Christy--Models, sensitivity, the PNAS paper and more

His objections seem to be about time course, not basic science. I'm sure he'd agree there'd be warming, if CO2 doubled from a recent historical average of 300 ppm to 600.

Actually he's warning about the reliance on models that are not only unproven, but based upon 'evidence' that has already been admitted unverifiable.

That's what you get when you pull numbers out of your ass... the data stinks too.

On a related note... way to move the goalposts Konrad! It's refreshing to see the sulky "well, he didn't say we were wrong per say... only that our timeline is fulla shit! I'm sure he agrees that we're right about everything else tho...: [/self-delusion]

Uh huh.

Heave! Heave! Heave! Come on... MOOOOOOVE that goalpost! HEAVE! HEAVE! HEAVE!

 

[Old Rocks]

Dr. Cristy has had to acknowledge that global warming is real. His objections about the models are a bit backasswards. They have not accurately modeled the warming. It has proceeded, in the area of the Arctic, far faster than anybodys predictions.

ExxonSecrets Factsheet: John Christy

Professor and Director, Atmospheric Science Department, University of Alabama at Huntsville
Alabama State Climatologist. Lead Author, 2001 IPCC TAR.

While he now acknowledges that global warming is real and the human contribution is significant, Christy has been a long-time skeptic who previously argued that satellite climate data do not show a trend toward global warming, and even show cooling in some areas. His findings have been widely disputed. Christy now asserts that global warming will have beneficial effects on the planet and that increased CO2 emissions from human activities are a net positive.

Christy was a contributing writer to "Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths," published by Competitive Enterprise Institute in 2002. He spoke at a June 1998 briefing for congressional staff and media, which was sponsored by the Cooler Heads Coalition.

PhD University of Illinois, 1987, Atmospheric Science M.S. University of Illinois, 1984, Atmospheric Science M.Div. Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, 1978 B.A. California State University, Fresno, 1973, Mathematics

We all remember his and Dr. Spencer's arguements about the satellite data. Turns out that he and Dr. Spencer were using a minus sign instead of a plus sign. When the correction was made, turns out that the data supported Dr. Hansen and the other scientests.

 

[Old Rocks]

The AGU, GSA, and other scientific societies go with the PNAS paper, not with Dr. Spencer or Dr. Cristy.
And Dr. Cristy keeps repeating the silly mantra that increased CO2 is good for all agriculture. Ignoring the effect of the unstable weather that comes with the warming, and the fact that the C4 plants do not do that well in a CO2 enriched atmosphere.