Winter Does Not Disprove Global Warming

[skookerasbil]

Yeah it is. All you have to do is examine the global temperature record. Why is it that you believe your unqualified opinion has any bearing on what the temperature record presents?

No it is not. Sorry that dog has already died.

The Earth is definitely warming. That's a fact. Unfortunately, bigbozo, it is your brain that has died.

yuk.......yuk.......yuk.........


philosophy in a science forum........is gay.








LMOA....I love when the arrows show up in the graphic above = nut sack kick to the k00ks.

 

[westwall]

Climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years | Mail Online

I wanted to make certain everyone was aware that the quote marks around "cover up" did not indicate that was a statement of any authority aimed at climate scientists, but actually a quote from the alarmist, scandal-breeding comment of the Guardian. No government authorities told climate scientists to "cover up" any of their findings.

The IPCC was created and is paid for by the world's government and ever since the beginning, they have had inputs into the content, style and format of the final reports. Since the beginning, the government has consistently urged greater caution in the IPCCs reporting than what was desired by the researchers actually assembling them.

Here is an excerpt from the link by the AP, who broke the story in the first place,....as can be seen there is a concerted effort to have scientists falsify data. The IPCC is either going to be a repository of the most up to date scientific data, or it is going to be a political action group not interested in science but interested in pushing an agenda. Old Abe here has shown that he wishes it to be the later.

"But leaked documents seen by the Associated Press, yesterday revealed deep concerns among politicians about a lack of global warming over the past few years.

Germany called for the references to the slowdown in warming to be deleted, saying looking at a time span of just 10 or 15 years was ‘misleading’ and they should focus on decades or centuries.

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed its tune after issuing stern warnings about climate change for years
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has changed its tune after issuing stern warnings about climate change for years

Hungary worried the report would provide ammunition for deniers of man-made climate change.

Belgium objected to using 1998 as a starting year for statistics, as it was exceptionally warm and makes the graph look flat - and suggested using 1999 or 2000 instead to give a more upward-pointing curve.

 

[SwimExpert]

Climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years | Mail Online

Just more braindead conspiracy theory nonsense for retards, as usual for bigbozo's posts.

Climate sceptics more likely to be conspiracy theorists and free market advocates, study claims
Research confirms previous findings which caused fury among sceptics of human-caused climate change
The Guardian
2 October 2013

Pew: Liberals most intolerant online « Hot Air

Then again, maybe you shouldn't simply believe everything you hear, just because someone else said it was "science." If you can't learn how to apply science and logic on your own so that you can actually evaluate the merits of what others people claim for yourself instead of just accepting it, then you have no business discussing or investigating anything of a scientific nature.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years | Mail Online

Just more braindead conspiracy theory nonsense for retards, as usual for bigbozo's posts.

Climate sceptics more likely to be conspiracy theorists and free market advocates, study claims
Research confirms previous findings which caused fury among sceptics of human-caused climate change
The Guardian
2 October 2013

Pew: Liberals most intolerant online « Hot Air

Then again, maybe you shouldn't simply believe everything you hear, just because someone else said it was "science." If you can't learn how to apply science and logic on your own so that you can actually evaluate the merits of what others people claim for yourself instead of just accepting it, then you have no business discussing or investigating anything of a scientific nature.

imagine that a free market advocate

--LOL

 

[SwimExpert]

Had NASA used the quality of scientists that populate the field of climatology our rockets would never have got off the ground. You see there are good scientists and bad ones. So far climatology has been a repository for the very bad ones.

That may be true. I think that people sometimes forget that scientists are humans too. They make mistakes. More importantly, they are subject to all of the human, earthly qualities that anyone else is. Scientists get jealous. They can be proud and boastful. They can be embarrassed to be wrong, and pig headed to admit it. They can be weak willed and follow the herd.

People also need to recognize that climate science is essentially a new born baby. We haven't been studying our climate for the past 1000 years. We haven't even been paying attention for a whole 200 years yet. One of the biggest and worst mistakes people keep making on this is trying to extrapolate 4 billion years worth of "knowledge" from 100 years worth of vague data.

 

[SwimExpert]

Climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years | Mail Online

Just more braindead conspiracy theory nonsense for retards, as usual for bigbozo's posts.

Climate sceptics more likely to be conspiracy theorists and free market advocates, study claims
Research confirms previous findings which caused fury among sceptics of human-caused climate change
The Guardian
2 October 2013

Pew: Liberals most intolerant online « Hot Air

Then again, maybe you shouldn't simply believe everything you hear, just because someone else said it was "science." If you can't learn how to apply science and logic on your own so that you can actually evaluate the merits of what others people claim for yourself instead of just accepting it, then you have no business discussing or investigating anything of a scientific nature.

Oh, and Matthew, negging me with offers of racially based male anatomy does not establish man made global warming. Even if it does warm your own man globes.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

yeah and you better listen to random internets nutters who offer no proof and merely spout off stupid lines as if they are smart.

while denying science that sent us to the moon and cured many diseases

doesn't matter we're all random internet nutters here in this forum including you and the warmers.

 

[itfitzme]

Had NASA used the quality of scientists that populate the field of climatology our rockets would never have got off the ground. You see there are good scientists and bad ones. So far climatology has been a repository for the very bad ones.

That may be true. I think that people sometimes forget that scientists are humans too. They make mistakes. More importantly, they are subject to all of the human, earthly qualities that anyone else is. Scientists get jealous. They can be proud and boastful. They can be embarrassed to be wrong, and pig headed to admit it. They can be weak willed and follow the herd.

People also need to recognize that climate science is essentially a new born baby. We haven't been studying our climate for the past 1000 years. We haven't even been paying attention for a whole 200 years yet. One of the biggest and worst mistakes people keep making on this is trying to extrapolate 4 billion years worth of "knowledge" from 100 years worth of vague data.

Not quite correct. We have been studying weather since Stonehenge and climate is a long trend offshoot of weather.

Scientists may be "human" but they are also far more knowledgeable than the typical "human".

Honestly, your points are simply too vague subjective to be meaningful.

Problem is, this

isn't "vague". It is both accurate and precise.

 

[SwimExpert]

Not quite correct. We have been studying weather since Stonehenge and climate is a long trend offshoot of weather.

Is that seriously the answer you want to go with?

Scientists may be "human" but they are also far more knowledgeable than the typical "human".

They are just as human as any other human. Being "knowledgeable" does not make a person any less prone to the same human nature as any other person.

Honestly, your points are simply too vague subjective to be meaningful.

You argue that modern climatic sciences are essentially an "offshoot" of the study of weather done by the ancient Celts, and I'm the one who lacks specificity?

Problem is, this

isn't "vague". It is both accurate and precise.

A 125 year snapshot of an environment that has existed for 4 billion years isn't "precise." It's extremely tunnel visioned.

 

[Abraham3]

The climate of 5 billion years back is as irrelevant to us today as it is possible to be.

 

[thanatos144]

We must put this into perspective. We are talking about the same people who say bad leadership does not mean Obama is a bad president

tapatalk post

 

[Abraham3]

I won't tell you to stay on topic because you've yet to get there. If you want to talk politics, there's an app for that. This just ain't it.

 

[thanatos144]

I won't tell you to stay on topic because you've yet to get there. If you want to talk politics, there's an app for that. This just ain't it.

Only a f****** idiot thinks this is not about politics

tapatalk post

 

[SwimExpert]

The climate of 5 billion years back is as irrelevant to us today as it is possible to be.

I did not say anything about what the climate was like 5 billion years ago. I said the the earth has been around for 5 billion years. The point is that geological activity occurs on very large scales, across thousands and millions of years. Everything that was think we know about the moving parts of the earth's ever changing climate is based on an eye's blink over the earth's life.

 

[freedombecki]

Climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years | Mail Online

Thanks for sharing that bigreb. It shows that certain politicians are making a dirty word out of the word, "deniers," which is sad for the scientific community:

Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed.

A leaked copy of a United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary, and the United States raised concerns about the final draft.

Published next week, it is expected to address the fact that temperatures have not yet exceeded it, which scientists have so far struggled to explain.

The report is the result of six years' work by UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which is seen as the world authority on the extent of climate change and what is causing it--on which governments including Britain's base their green policies.

...The United States delegation even weighed in, urging the authors of the report to explain away the lack of warming using the 'leading hypothesis' among scientists that the lower warming is down to more heat being absorbed by the ocean which has gotten hotter.

Oh, brother, put the politicians in, and it's EXPLAIN AWAY any darn thing they wish to have obfuscated in order to rip off taxes from governments using a nagging sense of wrongdoing if nothing is done. If that doesn't take the cake, I don't know what does.

 

[Abraham3]

Oh, brother, put the politicians in, and it's EXPLAIN AWAY any darn thing they wish to have obfuscated in order to rip off taxes from governments using a nagging sense of wrongdoing if nothing is done. If that doesn't take the cake, I don't know what does.

Could you explain what that means? And could you tell us what taxes you're talking about?

"rip off taxes from governments" ? ? ? Governments, plural? Governments of states? Of other countries?? And who is doing the ripping off?

"EXPLAIN AWAY any darn thing they wish to have obfuscated". Why would you explain something you want to obfuscate? Those are opposing actions.

 

[thanatos144]

Oh, brother, put the politicians in, and it's EXPLAIN AWAY any darn thing they wish to have obfuscated in order to rip off taxes from governments using a nagging sense of wrongdoing if nothing is done. If that doesn't take the cake, I don't know what does.

Could you explain what that means? And could you tell us what taxes you're talking about?

"rip off taxes from governments" ? ? ? Governments, plural? Governments of states? Of other countries?? And who is doing the ripping off?

"EXPLAIN AWAY any darn thing they wish to have obfuscated". Why would you explain something you want to obfuscate? Those are opposing actions.

You do know most of us live in the United States of America in each state has a government so yes it's governments. almost all taxes a rip off taxes.

tapatalk post

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I won't tell you to stay on topic because you've yet to get there. If you want to talk politics, there's an app for that. This just ain't it.

Only a f****** idiot thinks this is not about politics

tapatalk post

Maybe that's why he doesn't understand global warming, it's political.

 

[itfitzme]

I won't tell you to stay on topic because you've yet to get there. If you want to talk politics, there's an app for that. This just ain't it.

Only a f****** idiot thinks this is not about politics

tapatalk post

Maybe that's why he doesn't understand global warming, it's political.

Well, no. Anthropogenic Global Warming is not political. What is political is the politics surrounding the science of climate change.

The absorption spectrum of CO2 is not political. The mean global temperature is not political. The conversion of hydrocarbon chains into CO2, H2O and other molecules is not political. The carbon cycle isn't political. There is a reason that "science" and "politics" are different words that are not synonymous.

Some people seem to not understand the difference, making political such banal subjects as the equation of exchange. It seems that a defining characteristic of folks that are unable to separate the politics from the science is they are unable to separate the subjective from the objective. They are typically f****** idiots.

 

[thanatos144]

Only a f****** idiot thinks this is not about politics

tapatalk post

Maybe that's why he doesn't understand global warming, it's political.

Well, no. Anthropogenic Global Warming is not political. What is political is the politics surrounding the science of climate change.

The absorption spectrum of CO2 is not political. The mean global temperature is not political. The conversion of hydrocarbon chains into CO2, H2O and other molecules is not political. The carbon cycle isn't political. There is a reason that "science" and "politics" are different words that are not synonymous.

Some people seem to not understand the difference, making political such banal subjects as the equation of exchange. It seems that a defining characteristic of folks that are unable to separate the politics from the science is they are unable to separate the subjective from the objective. They are typically f****** idiots.

Except what you just posted is complete bullshit. co2 does not cause global warming it follows it.