tRump W.H. to create climate denier group.

[Toddsterpatriot]

All that to post you also can't find me one person who denies the climate changes?


.

Besides ummm the president who says that those who believe the facts that the Earth is warming is a "hoax" you mean.

Don't go full retard kid. It doesn't look good on you

Do you always try to change the goal posts when you are losing an argument, child?


.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Trump says that's a hoax.

Trump is denying the climate is changing.

Were you always this dumb or do you have an excuse for it like a major brain injury. Maybe you should retake 4th grade science.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Is it getting warmer for real?
Is that why they keep changing the historical data?

Saying adjusting temps for accuracy which show global warming (with or without those adjustments to be more accurate) is like saying "since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

I hope that's not how your brain works. It makes for a funny conspiracy but you can't be that dense.

"since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

More like saying, last week, "Look, I ran a 6 minute mile" and this week saying, "After adjusting my watch, I really ran a 4 minute mile".

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's why the Kyoto Treaty received so many votes in the Senate!!!

Well, I guess it's a good thing that empirical knowledge is not decided by democratic vote. Wait, you think it is? haha, how dumb.

97% agree with you, but you couldn't get a single fucking vote in the US Senate. LOL!

Just a good indication we need a little more science education in our elected officials.

And a lot more economics education in our AGW advocates.

 

[SandSquid]

Besides ummm the president who says that those who believe the facts that the Earth is warming is a "hoax" you mean.

Don't go full retard kid. It doesn't look good on you

Do you always try to change the goal posts when you are losing an argument, child?


.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Trump says that's a hoax.

Trump is denying the climate is changing.

Were you always this dumb or do you have an excuse for it like a major brain injury. Maybe you should retake 4th grade science.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Is it getting warmer for real?
Is that why they keep changing the historical data?

Saying adjusting temps for accuracy which show global warming (with or without those adjustments to be more accurate) is like saying "since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

I hope that's not how your brain works. It makes for a funny conspiracy but you can't be that dense.

"since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

More like saying, last week, "Look, I ran a 6 minute mile" and this week saying, "After adjusting my watch, I really ran a 4 minute mile".

Yup and there you are trying to say that proves you never even ran. Lol

Wow you are truly dense

 

[SandSquid]

Besides ummm the president who says that those who believe the facts that the Earth is warming is a "hoax" you mean.

Don't go full retard kid. It doesn't look good on you

Do you always try to change the goal posts when you are losing an argument, child?


.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Trump says that's a hoax.

Trump is denying the climate is changing.

Were you always this dumb or do you have an excuse for it like a major brain injury. Maybe you should retake 4th grade science.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Is it getting warmer for real?
Is that why they keep changing the historical data?

Well that other guy was looking for the morons who deny climate change... There is another.

So you are asking why when switching temp recording times in an area they adjust for time of day? Or when moving a reading location, they adjust for the temp difference? Or when a temp location which was rural ends up in the city they adjust for the local temp change?

Making more accurate temperature readings without bias is what you fear? Seems odd? Why do you want the less accurate data?

If you want the raw data, there you go. Shows... Global warming.





View attachment 249174





Stations have moved to different locations over the past 150 years, most more than once. They have changed instruments from mercury thermometers to electronic sensors, and have changed the time they take temperature measurements from afternoon to morning. Cities have grown up around stations, and some weather stations are not ideally located. All of these issues introduce inconsistencies into the temperature record.


The funny thing is even without these adjustments to remove bias, all it shows is global warming.

And of course NOT ONE of the conspiracy theories related to the temp adjustments has been able to prove global warming doesn't exist, now that any adjustment was made with any reason other than improving accuracy.


So sorry. Just because scientists adjusted Earth's orbit, earths circumference and Earth's temps in the past to be more accurate, it doesn't mean the sun revolves around the earth, that the Earth is flat, or that the Earth isn't warming.

So you are asking why when switching temp recording times in an area they adjust for time of day?

If they looked at a thermometer at 3 pm and recorded that data point, how can they now, decades later,
decide what the temperature was at noon, or whenever, to "adjust" the actual data?

Seems dishonest, if that's what they are doing.

Making more accurate temperature readings without bias is what you fear?

I fear changing actual readings into estimated readings to make them "more accurate".

You bet your ass.

Without bias? That's funny.

Why do you want the less accurate data?

I just want the data. What was actually recorded.

If you want the raw data, there you go.

Unless the warmers deleted it, eh?
Shows... Global warming.

You guys are winning, right?
So why do you keep cheating? Seems odd.​

Now you are asking questions.. glad to see you want to inform yourself finally. How do they know?

Well they put out 140 temp sensors reading temps all day every 2 seconds for over a decade to come to those conclusions. Then run them through a statistical comparison. And what they've found is they are even closer to those "pristine" sensors they placed away from urban settings... So again, what about accuracy scares you?



And yes without bias. Every change they've made has been public. Which adjustment are you saying was biased for warmth? Remember without those adjustments global warming is actually MORE pronounced.

So if you want. Go with the raw data. Global warming exists. Go with other countries. Global warming proven (even those who are not our allies). Go with ocean data. Yup... Global warming.

 

[SandSquid]

Do you always try to change the goal posts when you are losing an argument, child?


.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Trump says that's a hoax.

Trump is denying the climate is changing.

Were you always this dumb or do you have an excuse for it like a major brain injury. Maybe you should retake 4th grade science.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Is it getting warmer for real?
Is that why they keep changing the historical data?

Saying adjusting temps for accuracy which show global warming (with or without those adjustments to be more accurate) is like saying "since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

I hope that's not how your brain works. It makes for a funny conspiracy but you can't be that dense.

"since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

More like saying, last week, "Look, I ran a 6 minute mile" and this week saying, "After adjusting my watch, I really ran a 4 minute mile".

Yup and there you are trying to say that proves you never even ran. Lol

Wow you are truly dense

And actually that rate in relevance would be like saying instead of a 6 minute mile it was 6minutes and 1 second over the past 20 years.

But yes that is the proof you didn't run.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Do you always try to change the goal posts when you are losing an argument, child?


.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Trump says that's a hoax.

Trump is denying the climate is changing.

Were you always this dumb or do you have an excuse for it like a major brain injury. Maybe you should retake 4th grade science.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Is it getting warmer for real?
Is that why they keep changing the historical data?

Saying adjusting temps for accuracy which show global warming (with or without those adjustments to be more accurate) is like saying "since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

I hope that's not how your brain works. It makes for a funny conspiracy but you can't be that dense.

"since I had to adjust my watch forward last week 2 minutes, I've proven that time doesn't move forward".

More like saying, last week, "Look, I ran a 6 minute mile" and this week saying, "After adjusting my watch, I really ran a 4 minute mile".

Yup and there you are trying to say that proves you never even ran. Lol

Wow you are truly dense

Yup and there you are trying to say that proves you never even ran.

Of course you ran......hey, now you ran a 2 minute mile.

You're fucking awesome! DURR.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Do you always try to change the goal posts when you are losing an argument, child?


.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Trump says that's a hoax.

Trump is denying the climate is changing.

Were you always this dumb or do you have an excuse for it like a major brain injury. Maybe you should retake 4th grade science.

Scientists say that the proof climate is changing is that it's getting warmer

Is it getting warmer for real?
Is that why they keep changing the historical data?

Well that other guy was looking for the morons who deny climate change... There is another.

So you are asking why when switching temp recording times in an area they adjust for time of day? Or when moving a reading location, they adjust for the temp difference? Or when a temp location which was rural ends up in the city they adjust for the local temp change?

Making more accurate temperature readings without bias is what you fear? Seems odd? Why do you want the less accurate data?

If you want the raw data, there you go. Shows... Global warming.





View attachment 249174





Stations have moved to different locations over the past 150 years, most more than once. They have changed instruments from mercury thermometers to electronic sensors, and have changed the time they take temperature measurements from afternoon to morning. Cities have grown up around stations, and some weather stations are not ideally located. All of these issues introduce inconsistencies into the temperature record.


The funny thing is even without these adjustments to remove bias, all it shows is global warming.

And of course NOT ONE of the conspiracy theories related to the temp adjustments has been able to prove global warming doesn't exist, now that any adjustment was made with any reason other than improving accuracy.


So sorry. Just because scientists adjusted Earth's orbit, earths circumference and Earth's temps in the past to be more accurate, it doesn't mean the sun revolves around the earth, that the Earth is flat, or that the Earth isn't warming.

So you are asking why when switching temp recording times in an area they adjust for time of day?

If they looked at a thermometer at 3 pm and recorded that data point, how can they now, decades later,
decide what the temperature was at noon, or whenever, to "adjust" the actual data?

Seems dishonest, if that's what they are doing.

Making more accurate temperature readings without bias is what you fear?

I fear changing actual readings into estimated readings to make them "more accurate".

You bet your ass.

Without bias? That's funny.

Why do you want the less accurate data?

I just want the data. What was actually recorded.

If you want the raw data, there you go.

Unless the warmers deleted it, eh?
Shows... Global warming.

You guys are winning, right?
So why do you keep cheating? Seems odd.​

Now you are asking questions.. glad to see you want to inform yourself finally. How do they know?

Well they put out 140 temp sensors reading temps all day every 2 seconds for over a decade to come to those conclusions. Then run them through a statistical comparison. And what they've found is they are even closer to those "pristine" sensors they placed away from urban settings... So again, what about accuracy scares you?



And yes without bias. Every change they've made has been public. Which adjustment are you saying was biased for warmth? Remember without those adjustments global warming is actually MORE pronounced.

So if you want. Go with the raw data. Global warming exists. Go with other countries. Global warming proven (even those who are not our allies). Go with ocean data. Yup... Global warming.

Well they put out 140 temp sensors reading temps all day every 2 seconds for over a decade to come to those conclusions.

Well, if that's all it takes to "adjust" the mercury thermometer readings from the 19th Century......LOL!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

97% agree with you, but you couldn't get a single fucking vote in the US Senate.

But you sound like a retard, since the proposition up for a vote wasn't, "Are accepted climate theories true?" And, even if your little fantasy implication were true, it still would not speak to the truth of climate theories.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Is it getting warmer for real?
Is that why they keep changing the historical data?

Ah, Todd the charlatan, trying another dimestore parlor trick. Does this one work when you are public science, or discussing climate science with scientists? Wait, you could never do that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

97% agree with you, but you couldn't get a single fucking vote in the US Senate.

But you sound like a retard, since the proposition up for a vote wasn't, "Are accepted climate theories true?"

The proposition involved damaging our economy while China and India were given a free ride.
Kind of like the moronic Green New Deal, eh?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The proposition involved damaging our economy while China and India were given a free ride.

Gotcha. So not a rebuke of climate science at all. Tell that retard Todd he is embarrassing himself. Hey, wait a sec....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The proposition involved damaging our economy while China and India were given a free ride.

Gotcha. So not a rebuke of climate science at all. Tell that retard Todd he is embarrassing himself. Hey, wait a sec....

Hey, if you want to discuss climate science but don't want to damage our economy, go for it.
Just don't let AOC know...….

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hey, if you want to discuss climate science but don't want to damage our economy, go for it.

Hmm, no,I can freely talk about both climate science and economic pain caused by any proposed mitigation measures withour shitting myself, as you do. For i am an adult.

 

[Crepitus]

Climate denier says "don't confuse me with the facts!"

Exactly!!!

That's why the Kyoto Treaty received so many votes in the Senate!!!

Because...…..facts.

Yes, the republican senate didn't use any.

View attachment 249095

How many Dem votes did Kyoto receive?

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

So Dems could have voted to damage our economy without worrying it would pass.

So how many Dem votes did it get? 40? 30? Couple of dozen, at least?

Look it up. My name's not Google.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Exactly!!!

That's why the Kyoto Treaty received so many votes in the Senate!!!

Because...…..facts.

Yes, the republican senate didn't use any.

View attachment 249095

How many Dem votes did Kyoto receive?

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

So Dems could have voted to damage our economy without worrying it would pass.

So how many Dem votes did it get? 40? 30? Couple of dozen, at least?

Look it up. My name's not Google.

The answer was zero.....moron.

 

[Crepitus]

Yes, the republican senate didn't use any.

View attachment 249095

How many Dem votes did Kyoto receive?

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

So Dems could have voted to damage our economy without worrying it would pass.

So how many Dem votes did it get? 40? 30? Couple of dozen, at least?

Look it up. My name's not Google.

The answer was zero.....moron.

Well post it up, back up your assertions .

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How many Dem votes did Kyoto receive?

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

So Dems could have voted to damage our economy without worrying it would pass.

So how many Dem votes did it get? 40? 30? Couple of dozen, at least?

Look it up. My name's not Google.

The answer was zero.....moron.

Well post it up, back up your assertions .

Post it up yourself.

 

[Darkwind]

So, they oppose people who are a skeptic of and have valid arguments against climate change, being given a voice.

Same for flat earthers , faith healers, astrologers, and fortune tellers. Go find your own forums, freaks.

America IS our forum. You just don't like it when your wrong and you are called on it, which is what is happening. You fucks are being called on your BS.

 

[Crepitus]

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

Senate was republican controlled so it makes no difference.

So Dems could have voted to damage our economy without worrying it would pass.

So how many Dem votes did it get? 40? 30? Couple of dozen, at least?

Look it up. My name's not Google.

The answer was zero.....moron.

Well post it up, back up your assertions .

Post it up yourself.

You made the claim kid, since you can't back it up I'm gonna assume you just pulled it outta yer ass.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

America IS our forum.

Then stop whining like a little baby about being denied a forum.