500 scientists say there is no climate emergency

[Dagosa]

Maybe if ding repeats himself again, he will upend the IPCC report.

Or maybe not.

You mean, ding dong ? Unlikely.

 

[ding]

You mean, ding dong ? Unlikely.

You are even more useless than fortfuntakesitintheass.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I don't think anyone has him on ignore.

I put him on ignore over a year ago.

LOL

 

[Crick]

I put him on ignore over a year ago.

LOL

So, that's one...

 

[abu afak]

"...the amount of warming directly caused by us adding extra CO2 to the atmosphere is, by itself, relatively weak. It has been calculated theoretically that, if there are no other changes in the climate system, a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration would cause about 1 deg C of surface warming. This is NOT a controversial statement…it is well understood by climate scientists. As of early 2019, we were about 50% of the way toward a doubling of atmospheric CO2..."

GW 101 « Roy Spencer, PhD

But even the Denier Spencer Cutely/Deceptively uses the phrase "if CO2 By Itself," fully knowing it also drives how much Water Vapor it causes.. Causes More he goes on to mention. (unquoted)

Same with Methane as it snowballs it's feedback from and into more warming.
SO CO2 "IF ONLY Viewed by itself" is a DISINGENUOUS TRY.
Those 3 GHGs drive virtually ALL the warming triggered by... CO2.

Deceptive Scvmbag poster and Citation.
It might work on Fort Fun, but Not Me.
I understand the climate System.

`

 

[ding]

But even the Denier Spencer Cutely/Deceptively uses the phrase "if CO2 By Itself," fully knowing it also drives how much Water Vapor it causes.. Causes More he goes on to mention. (unquoted)

Same with Methane as it snowballs it's feedback from and into more warming.
SO CO2 "IF ONLY Viewed by itself" is a DISINGENUOUS TRY.
Those 3 GHGs drive virtually ALL The warming triggered by CO2.

Deceptive Scvmbag poster and Citation.
It might work in Fort Fun, but Not Me.
I understand the climate System.

`

You posts are incoherent. And that's a generous assessment. Please tell me you are drunk.

 

[abu afak]

You posts are incoherent. And that's a generous assessment. Please tell me you are drunk.

Why is your every post so DISHONEST?
You know you are Wrong but are trying to delude yourself too?
Trying to save your other 100,000 pieces of Idiocy, and your belief system at the cost of being shown wrong Hourly.
Seeing if you can pull it off?
It Never works on me and you NEVER have a Real answer. EVER.
`
`

 

[ding]

Why is your every post so DISHONEST?
You know you are Wrong but are trying to delude yourself too?
Trying to save your other 100,000 pieces of Idiocy, and save your belief system at the cost of being shown wrong Hourly.
Seeing if you can pull it off?
It Never works on med and you NEVER have a Real answer. EVER.
`
`

You couldn't write a coherent paragraph to save your life, could you?

 

[ding]

Why is your every post so DISHONEST?
You know you are Wrong but are trying to delude yourself too?
Trying to save your other 100,000 pieces of Idiocy, and your belief system at the cost of being shown wrong Hourly.
Seeing if you can pull it off?
It Never works on me and you NEVER have a Real answer. EVER.
(Spencer and "CO2 by itself" is GONE!!)
YOU had to revert to one line trolling as twice above.
`
`

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[abu afak]

You couldn't write a coherent paragraph to save your life, could you?

Why is your every post so DISHONEST?
You know you are Wrong but are trying to delude yourself too?
Trying to save your other 100,000 pieces of Idiocy, and your belief system at the cost of being shown wrong Hourly.
Seeing if you can pull it off?
It Never works on me and you NEVER have a Real answer. EVER.
(Spencer and "CO2 by itself" is GONE!!)
YOU had to revert to one line trolling as thrice above.
`
`

 

[Dagosa]

The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Here’s the press release, here’ the list of 500 signees, and here’s the opening of the letter:




Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:


MP: What about that “consensus” and “settled science” about climate change we always hear about? How can there be a consensus when there’s a global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields who challenge the “settled science”?

Actually, challenging the consensus among the scientific community is nothing new, but those the voices of those challenging the consensus are always drowned out by the tsunami of climate hysteria from the climate alarmists. For example, in 2012 a group of more than 125 scientists sent an open letter to the United Nations warning that scientific evidence refuted UN Secretary-General’s Ban Ki-Moon repeated assertions on weather and climate. Those warnings of climate hysteria unsupported by the scientific evidence were ignored in 2012, just like the letter from the 500 prominent scientists and professionals will be ignored in 2019. In other words, it’s “deja vu all over again.”

There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations

The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech...

www.aei.org

The last list was made up of fake Americans which was easy to Track as non existent and dead people.
you‘ve made it harder. Still, lots of dead people and those of no known consequence. Aren’t you embarrassed by all this BS you spew ?

 

[Robert W]

The last list was made up of fake Americans which was easy to Track as non existent and dead people.
you‘ve made it harder. Still, lots of dead people and those of no known consequence. Aren’t you embarrassed by all this BS you spew ?

You will now get to hear the Hall of Fame speech by Dennis Eckersley. Dennis paid tribute to a mutual friend, Mike Jacinto. Mike and I worked closely. Mike had a slogan. BEAT. Be a Team.
Dennis and he were close friends. I say were because Mike passed away after the final retirement of Dennis. I and Mike would from time to time bring up Dennis Eckersley. As Dennis says in his Hall of Fame speech, he was proud he came from Fremont, Ca. My Oldest daughter was born in Fremont. I raised my first family in that community. Mike was in the audience for his Hall of Fame speech.

God help you if he finds out you are mocking him in an avatar.

 

[Dagosa]

You will now get to hear the Hall of Fame speech by Dennis Eckersley. Dennis paid tribute to a mutual friend, Mike Jacinto. Mike and I worked closely. Mike had a slogan. BEAT. Be a Team.
Dennis and he were close friends. I say were because Mike passed away after the final retirement of Dennis. I and Mike would from time to time bring up Dennis Eckersley. As Dennis says in his Hall of Fame speech, he was proud he came from Fremont, Ca. My Oldest daughter was born in Fremont. I raised my first family in that community. Mike was in the audience for his Hall of Fame speech.

God help you if he finds out you are mocking him in an avatar.

Wow, you stayed off topic for a record time. All-of a sudden you’re an Eck admirer. Good.

 

[Rigby5]

The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the United Nations about her fears of a climate emergency, a group of 500 prominent scientists and professionals, led by the CLINTEL co-founder Guus Berkhout, sent this registered letter to the United Nations Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Here’s the press release, here’ the list of 500 signees, and here’s the opening of the letter:




Here are the specific points about climate change highlighted in the letter:


MP: What about that “consensus” and “settled science” about climate change we always hear about? How can there be a consensus when there’s a global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields who challenge the “settled science”?

Actually, challenging the consensus among the scientific community is nothing new, but those the voices of those challenging the consensus are always drowned out by the tsunami of climate hysteria from the climate alarmists. For example, in 2012 a group of more than 125 scientists sent an open letter to the United Nations warning that scientific evidence refuted UN Secretary-General’s Ban Ki-Moon repeated assertions on weather and climate. Those warnings of climate hysteria unsupported by the scientific evidence were ignored in 2012, just like the letter from the 500 prominent scientists and professionals will be ignored in 2019. In other words, it’s “deja vu all over again.”

There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations

The video above is from Friends of Science, a Canada-based “non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals.” On the same day last week that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech...

www.aei.org

Wrong.
The only people who say there is no recent human cause global warming are paid fakes who are obviously lying.

We know the main climate change cycle normally is based on CO2 and is about 110,000 years long, and there have been at least a dozen of these carbon cycles.

But we have almost doubled the atmospheric carbon in less than 150 years, so have accelerated the normal climate cycle by a factor of around 500 times faster.

 

[ding]

Wrong.
The only people who way there is no recent human cause global warming are paid fakes who are obviously lying.

We know the main climate change cycle normally is based on CO2 and is about 110,000 years long, and there have been at least a dozen of these carbon cycles.

But we have almost doubled the atmospheric carbon in less than 150 years, so have accelerated the normal climate cycle by a factor of around 500 times faster.

They attribute almost all warming to CO2 which is ridiculous. The present warming trend is 400 years old and began 150 years before the industrial revolution. So how can you say almost all warming is due to CO2 and almost none of it is due to natural climate fluctuations which the geologic record is littered with?

 

[Rigby5]

No lil crick, you have not answered and you will not because crick does not agree with facts

The fact is industry will never be powered with green energy

Why should the inefficient use of our natural resources be mandatory. Why should using inefficient green energy be mandatory.

The answer to why it must be mandatory is because the cost is to high, for the economy, for the environment

It is easy to prove you are totally wrong.

Since fossil fuels are ancient and take hundreds of millions of years of photosynthesis and anerobic bacteria to create, we will soon run out of fossil fuel regardless of what we do or decide.
Green energy is anything but currently sequestered carbon based fossil fuel, and there is no doubt at all we will soon run out of sequestered carbon fossil fuel.
And when it does run out, then clearly industry will have to be "powered with green energy".
There will be nothing else.
All the sequestered carbon based fossil fuel will be gone.

The only correct thing you said was that green energy is slightly more expensive than sequestered carbon fossil fuel.
But that does not mean we should not switch now instead of waiting until we run out, because we need fossil fuel for fertilizers.
Carbon based fossil fuels contain all the nitrogen, phosphors, potassium, etc. that we need for plants, because fossil fuels are made from concentrated old plants.

 

[ding]

It is easy to prove you are totally wrong.

Since fossil fuels are ancient and take hundreds of millions of years of photosynthesis and anerobic bacteria to create, we will soon run out of fossil fuel regardless of what we do or decide.
Green energy is anything but currently sequestered carbon based fossil fuel, and there is no doubt at all we will soon run out of sequestered carbon fossil fuel.
And when it does run out, then clearly industry will have to be "powered with green energy".
There will be nothing else.
All the sequestered carbon based fossil fuel will be gone.

The only correct thing you said was that green energy is slightly more expensive than sequestered carbon fossil fuel.
But that does not mean we should not switch now instead of waiting until we run out, because we need fossil fuel for fertilizers.
Carbon based fossil fuels contain all the nitrogen, phosphors, potassium, etc. that we need for plants, because fossil fuels are made from concentrated old plants.

The market will take care of itself. They don't need the government to tell them what is economical and what isn't. Or do you prefer communism. Because that was so successful.

 

[Rigby5]

They attribute almost all warming to CO2 which is ridiculous. The present warming trend is 400 years old and began 150 years before the industrial revolution. So how can you say almost all warming is due to CO2 and almost none of it is due to natural climate fluctuations which the geologic record is littered with?

Wrong.
The past natural warming cycle started about 50,000 years ago and melted off the glaciers that covered most of North America.
We are about 10,000 years after the natural warming cycle ended and the next cooling cycles started.

Your claim there was a warming starting 400 years ago is just false.

Temperature Plateau Likely Due to Deep Ocean Warming | Climate Central

Climate skeptics have seized on a pause in warming over the past five years, but the long-term trend is still upwards.

www.climatecentral.org

Obviously it was actually slightly cooling until around 1900 or so.

 

[Rigby5]

The market will take care of itself. They don't need the government to tell them what is economical and what isn't. Or do you prefer communism. Because that was so successful.

Communism of course is always the most successful, but no one has ever allowed any large government to ever be communist.
For example, Lenin was a paid German agent to take Russia out of WWI, and Stalin was a capitalist bank robber.

The reason we can't allow the market to decide is that since fossil fuels are finite and unreplaceable, and we need them for fertilizers instead wasting them for transportation that can use other things.
For example, we can make hydrogen from nuclear power plants, in order to power vehicles.
Or we can do like Brazil and make ethanol from plants.

 

[Rigby5]

What the climate deniers ignore is that adding more carbon to the atmosphere does not itself cause heat, but changes how much heat is retained vs radiated away, constantly.
It is an accumulating process.
That is why the earth does not drop to zero degrees every night.
And the excess carbon we added will not stop retaining more and more heat for a very long time.
We do not know how long.
And we do not know then what the final temperature will be when it finally reaches equilibrium.
It may be so hot that eventually all the surface water in the oceans evaporate.