2020 Ties for Hottest Year on Record, NASA Says (Nullfying 10,000 "it's cold this morning" posts here)

[Anomalism]

Your side is preventing publication?

If there was compelling evidence that disputes AGW it would not have a hard time getting published. There are plenty of people/groups that would fund that. You're delusional. The work doesn't exist because the evidence points somewhere else. If AGW isn't happening it won't be shown until more information is collected.

 

[Anomalism]

AGW believers would never interfere with skeptics?
Would never try to cut off funding or prevent publication?

That's ridiculous. DURR.

If they were obviously wrong there would be plenty of current work and publications disputing their claims.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your side is preventing publication?

If there was compelling evidence that disputes AGW it would not have a hard time getting published. There are plenty of people/groups that would fund that. You're delusional. The work doesn't exist because nobody is doing it. If AGW isn't happening it won't be shown until more information is collected.

How do you feel about "Hide the decline"?
About "Mike's Nature Trick"?

 

[Anomalism]

How do you feel about "Hide the decline"?
About "Mike's Nature Trick"?

Go ahead and explain to me in your own words why Mike's Nature Trick proves wrong countless scientists and scientific institutions all over the world. Are they trying to keep his groundbreaking work a secret?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How do you feel about "Hide the decline"?
About "Mike's Nature Trick"?

Go ahead and explain to me in your own words why Mike's Nature Trick proves wrong countless scientists and scientific institutions all over the world. Are they trying to keep his groundbreaking work a secret?

You have no problem with Mike's Nature Trick?

It doesn't make you a little uncomfortanle?

 

[Anomalism]

You have no problem with Mike's Nature Trick?

It doesn't make you a little uncomfortanle?

Will you do what I asked you to do?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You have no problem with Mike's Nature Trick?

It doesn't make you a little uncomfortanle?

Will you do what I asked you to do?

Still afraid?

Need a safe space?

 

[Sunsettommy]

How do you feel about "Hide the decline"?
About "Mike's Nature Trick"?

Go ahead and explain to me in your own words why Mike's Nature Trick proves wrong countless scientists and scientific institutions all over the world. Are they trying to keep his groundbreaking work a secret?

You have no problem with Mike's Nature Trick?

It doesn't make you a little uncomfortanle?

He shows his ignorance and science illiteracy in every post.

He has no idea what Makes Nature trick is.

That is why he is ducking and weaving in his replies.

 

[Sunsettommy]

No, it is because you have no idea what Dr. Mann has published, that is why you can't answer a simple question.

I have read two of his published papers, have you read any of his papers?

You think like a child, act like a child, you are a bottom dwelling child.

I'm a lot less hostile and insulting than you are, Mr. grown up. Maybe feeling ignorant is upsetting you. Mann is nothing but a distraction from the point I'm making, a point you have been deliberately ignoring.

You haven't made a point at all, you haven't read any of his papers, therefore you have no idea what he thinks about the topic. You have no idea what the AGW conjecture is either, you are a programmed lemming filled with fallacies and bullshit.

You will NEVER discuss anything, because you don't know anything about it.

Dr. Mann's "Hockey Stick" paper was refuted years ago, that is a fact you will fight because YOU are programmed to fight it.

 

[Sunsettommy]

How do you feel about "Hide the decline"?
About "Mike's Nature Trick"?

Go ahead and explain to me in your own words why Mike's Nature Trick proves wrong countless scientists and scientific institutions all over the world. Are they trying to keep his groundbreaking work a secret?

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

Your ignorance of it is making a big fool of you. Give you a hint, skeptics didn't make that, it was the warmist/alarmist who made that up.

You are so pathetic.

 

[Anomalism]

You will NEVER discuss anything, because you don't know anything about it.

I don't discuss the science because I'm not an arrogant nitwit. I defer to the experts.

 

[Anomalism]

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

Your ignorance of it is making a big fool of you. Give you a hint, skeptics didn't make that, it was the warmist/alarmist who made that up.

You are so pathetic.

It's always actual scientists that do the work. That's kind of my point. You don't understand as much about their work as they do. It doesn't make sense to you because you're ignorant, not because there's a conspiracy.

 

[Anomalism]

He shows his ignorance and science illiteracy in every post.

He has no idea what Makes Nature trick is.

That is why he is ducking and weaving in his replies.

Everything you're clinging onto right now is a duck and a weave. You've been avoiding reality and the real conversation the entire time.

 

[Anomalism]

Still afraid?

Need a safe space?

You're getting boring. Anything else?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Still afraid?

Need a safe space?

You're getting boring. Anything else?

I defer to the experts.

Even when they use "Mike's Nature Trick"?

 

[Anomalism]

I defer to the experts.

Even when they use "Mike's Nature Trick"?

What do you think a climatologist would say about Mike's Nature Trick? Do you think it just slipped their minds, or is your observation not as relevant as you think it is because you're ignorant?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I defer to the experts.

Even when they use "Mike's Nature Trick"?

What do you think a climatologist would say about Mike's Nature Trick? Do you think it just slipped their minds, or is your observation not as relevant as you think it is because you're ignorant?

What do you think a climatologist would say about Mike's Nature Trick?

An honest one, or the ones who used it?

 

[Anomalism]

An honest one, or the ones who used it?

First tell me what the active and honest climatologists are saying. Do you have any examples?

 

[Eaglekeeper]

Would it do any good here to recommend a book: "Climate Change: The Facts"?

Climate change was turned into an enormous industry in and of itself, starting in the 1970s. In 77, Time said global cooling, then it became global warming, now just change. Once the poorer nations realized they would be subsidized by the wealthier nations in this scheme, it really took off.

Most scientists are also people who need to make money and like to live well. If climate change goes away, then so do all of the grants given to study its effects.

NASA also gets billions in funding to study climate change, so they now have a stake in the game. The first indication that something is amiss with their analysis is they also choose to ignore data prior to 80,000 years ago, when temperatures have been determined to have been several degrees warmer than any projected temperature from the models (think dinosaurs).

They have repeatedly tried to use the climate models to match what has happened in history, in order to validate them, and they have been incorrect in every case where peer review has validated the methods used.

 

[abu afak]

... The first indication that something is amiss with their analysis is they also choose to ignore data prior to 80,000 years ago, when temperatures have been determined to have been several degrees warmer than any projected temperature from the models (think dinosaurs).

They have repeatedly tried to use the climate models to match what has happened in history, in order to validate them, and they have been incorrect in every case where peer review has validated the methods used.

Completely False and fabricated by you.
NASA has done extensive data collection and analysis on all periods.

why is warming human, nasa - Google Search

You're a total stupid **** and liar.
Just what this section needs... another RW clown.
Does USMB have a recruiter in a Right Wing High School?

`

`