Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

[wirebender]

TSI down for 50 years, temps going up. Planet wide experiment done. Results in. You are a dumbass, Bent.

When one considers the subject of increased solar output, TSI is not the only cause of increased cosmic rays rocks. I wouldn't expect you to know that and I doubt that having the information alters your faith in any way, but there it is anyway.

 

[daveman]

It was done in 1896, dumbass.

Oh, you mean the little box with two variables that's supposed to simulate an entire planet's atmosphere and oceans with millions of variables?

Yeah. Wrong.

It wasn't done in that little box either. To suggest that the CO2 absorbed and retained the energy is to misunderstand what the experiment showed.

Wait...are they claiming the temperature of the box continued rising with a constant level of IR being input?

 

[daveman]

TSI down for 50 years, temps going up. Planet wide experiment done. Results in. You are a dumbass, Bent.

You're funny, Roxy.


And sometimes, you're humorous, too.

 

[wirebender]

TSI down for 50 years, temps going up. Planet wide experiment done. Results in. You are a dumbass, Bent.

You're funny, Roxy.


And sometimes, you're humorous, too.

Mostly, he's just sad.

 

[daveman]

TSI down for 50 years, temps going up. Planet wide experiment done. Results in. You are a dumbass, Bent.

You're funny, Roxy.


And sometimes, you're humorous, too.

Mostly, he's just sad.

Well, yeah.

 

[FactFinder]

Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics

Oh hail ye master internet creator!

 

[ScienceRocks]

Did it convert any skeptics?

 

[Old Rocks]

TSI down for 50 years, temps going up. Planet wide experiment done. Results in. You are a dumbass, Bent.

When one considers the subject of increased solar output, TSI is not the only cause of increased cosmic rays rocks. I wouldn't expect you to know that and I doubt that having the information alters your faith in any way, but there it is anyway.

At this time, absolutely no evidence exists that cosmic rays have any real influence in warming or cooling the atmosphere.

 

[wirebender]

It is very easy to correlate the levels of CO2 and CH4 to periods of warmth and glaciation in the geological record.

Rocks, you are a hoot. No matter what the topic, you manage to offer a link to something that you believe is evidence that contradicts whatever is being said on the topic. In ususal form, the info in your link does no such thing. If you believe the guy in that video contradicts what I said in the context in which it was said, by all means simply point out the time mark and I will go back and listen again.

Or, as usual, don't mention a time mark because in reality you really don't understand what I said, or what the guy in your video is saying either.

By the way doofus, my comments on warm and cool cycles were related to moving continents in response to Matthew's observations, not CH4 and CO2 concentrations. Try reading for comprehension some time.

 

[wirebender]

Oh, you mean the little box with two variables that's supposed to simulate an entire planet's atmosphere and oceans with millions of variables?

Yeah. Wrong.

It wasn't done in that little box either. To suggest that the CO2 absorbed and retained the energy is to misunderstand what the experiment showed.

Wait...are they claiming the temperature of the box continued rising with a constant level of IR being input?

The box was a closed system. No convection or conduction. It doesn't represent an open system like the atmosphere of the earth. Caiming that box represents the open atmosphere of the earth is like claiming that the workings of a refrigerator represent an accurate way of applying the second law of thermodynamics to the atmosphere and that energy does actually flow from cool objects to warm objects.

 

[wirebender]

At this time, absolutely no evidence exists that cosmic rays have any real influence in warming or cooling the atmosphere.

I know that you wish it were true rocks, but alas, it isn't. The cracks in the dam are expanding and the more we learn, the less important so called greenhouse gasses other than water vapor will become.

 

[daveman]

It wasn't done in that little box either. To suggest that the CO2 absorbed and retained the energy is to misunderstand what the experiment showed.

Wait...are they claiming the temperature of the box continued rising with a constant level of IR being input?

The box was a closed system. No convection or conduction. It doesn't represent an open system like the atmosphere of the earth. Caiming that box represents the open atmosphere of the earth is like claiming that the workings of a refrigerator represent an accurate way of applying the second law of thermodynamics to the atmosphere and that energy does actually flow from cool objects to warm objects.

And the funny part is they claim to understand science.

 

[westwall]

TSI down for 50 years, temps going up. Planet wide experiment done. Results in. You are a dumbass, Bent.

When one considers the subject of increased solar output, TSI is not the only cause of increased cosmic rays rocks. I wouldn't expect you to know that and I doubt that having the information alters your faith in any way, but there it is anyway.

At this time, absolutely no evidence exists that cosmic rays have any real influence in warming or cooling the atmosphere.

At this time there is zero empirical evidence that shows CO2 is a driver of temperature. In fact the opposite is true. Additionally there is no empirical data that shows man has any effect on global climate.

The only evidence the warmists can present is crappy computer models.

 

[wirebender]

At this time there is zero empirical evidence that shows CO2 is a driver of temperature. In fact the opposite is true. Additionally there is no empirical data that shows man has any effect on global climate.

The only evidence the warmists can present is crappy computer models.

And the funny/sad thing is that now the output of those self same crappy models is being used as if it were actually observed data.

 

[westwall]

At this time there is zero empirical evidence that shows CO2 is a driver of temperature. In fact the opposite is true. Additionally there is no empirical data that shows man has any effect on global climate.

The only evidence the warmists can present is crappy computer models.

And the funny/sad thing is that now the output of those self same crappy models is being used as if it were actually observed data.

Yes, I read a "study" that was derived from three computer models running along on their merry way and then the "data" from those models was massaged to present the warmists newest case. And people like oltrakarfraud and rdean think that that is science. I am amazed they can feed themselves.

 

[IanC]

Watts has an article up that shows Gore exaggerated the number of viewers for his Climate Hoax day. does anyone know the cut off point where exaggerating becomes lying? one order of magnitude perhaps? perhaps I should edit my statement.

 

[skookerasbil]

Watts has an article up that shows Gore exaggerated the number of viewers for his Climate Hoax day. does anyone know the cut off point where exaggerating becomes lying? one order of magnitude perhaps? perhaps I should edit my statement.

Al Gore's five loaves and two fishes – Telegraph Blogs


Ive been saying for two years now.............nobody cares about this shit anymore except the k00ks. When I saw the number of people who tuned in to see Gore's fantasy documentary, I laughed my balls off.

 

[wirebender]

Watts has an article up that shows Gore exaggerated the number of viewers for his Climate Hoax day. does anyone know the cut off point where exaggerating becomes lying? one order of magnitude perhaps? perhaps I should edit my statement.

I would guess that if you inflate the number of viewers from 17,000 to 8 million, you can rightly be called a bald faced liar.

 

[westwall]

Watts has an article up that shows Gore exaggerated the number of viewers for his Climate Hoax day. does anyone know the cut off point where exaggerating becomes lying? one order of magnitude perhaps? perhaps I should edit my statement.

I would guess that if you inflate the number of viewers from 17,000 to 8 million, you can rightly be called a bald faced liar.

No, no he is just refining his use of the various "proxies". Just give him some time to alter...I mean hide...I mean well ...you know he needs to do it when no one is watching, people "scare" him you know......

 

[Dragon]

The only people who take Al Gore seriously are climate-change deniers.