Antarctica hits warmest temperature ever recorded

863b00e777af71fea9d7d53cc5ec353e.jpg
For some reasons, being an uneducated slob who denies science is cool with American rightwingers, as long as it is the politically correct topic for them.


The left are the science deniers
Science doesnt bend to their tantrums.
Irrelevant. Stay on topic. And put your denial on display, so we can laugh at you.
 
Were talking geological time periods where instants are measured in eons.
When discussing rapid warming caused by mankind's actions? No we aren't. That's literally the entire reason scientists are concerned. You know, the scientists who taught you everything and anything you know and ever will know about climate. This is a basic fact of this topic that a grown man like you should not be ignorant of.

Here's a scientific fact for ya. If you don't soon get your head out of your ass you're liable to suffer from asphyxiation and die. Your brain is already suffering from oxygen deprivation.
 
And if humans had never evolved or put CO2 into the atmosphere, we have no proof this would not have happened anyway.
100% wrong. It is established that mankind's actions have caused the rapid warming we are observing. Again, that is literally the fundamental basis of this topic.
Nope. That hasn't been established.

It is just a theory.


It is pushed by political organizations.

Most of the warming is done. . . BY THE SUN.


Global Warming, Carbon Dioxide and the Solar Minimum
Global Warming, Carbon Dioxide and the Solar Minimum

". . . Before the IPCC formed, NOAA’s Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii registered co2 levelsat under 350 ppm (parts per million) with the explicit warning that if co2 exceeded that number, Mother Earth was in Big Trouble – and there would be no turning back for humanity. Those alarm bells continue today as co2 levels have risen to 414 ppm as temperatures peaked in 1998.

From the outset, the IPCC controlled the debate by limiting its charter

"to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”

In other words, before any of the science had been done, the IPCC’s assumption was that man-made activity was responsible and that Nature was not an active participant in a process within its own sphere of interest. As an interdisciplinary topic of multiple diversity, the IPCC is not an authority on all the disciplines of science within the CC domain.

While there is no dispute among scientists that the Sun and its cyclical output is the true external force driving Earth’s energy and climate system as part of a Sun-centered Universe, the IPCC’s exclusion of the Sun from its consideration can only be seen as a deliberate thwarting of a basic fundamental law of science, a process which assures a free inquiry based on reason and evidence.

It is the Sun which all planets of the solar system orbit around, that has the strongest gravitational pull in the solar system, is the heaviest of all celestial bodies and its sunspots in relation to Earth’s temperatures has been known since Galileo began drawing sunspots in 1613.

Yet the IPCC which touts a ‘scientific view of climate change’ would have us believe the Sun is irrelevant and immaterial to the IPCC’s world view and Earth’s climate; hardly a blip on their radar.. . "


The IPCC’s fatal founding flaw
The IPCC’s fatal founding flaw – Quadrant Online

"The media at large and the public that the media influences seem to believe that the IPCC is an international authority on all aspects of climate. This is a popular but false notion. The IPCC is, in fact, no more than a craftily assembled government-supported lobby group, doing what lobby groups usually do.


Its charter gives the game away:

"The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation."

Or, put more simply, the IPCC is to report on the magnitude of man-made climate change and what can be done to reduce its impact, the existence of man-made climate change being assumed from the outset.

The IPCC was established through the urgings of the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The former is a shadowy organisation that conducted scientific projects for UNEP and wrote in-house reports. Given the amount of work it undertook, those reports probably aligned closely with UNEP thinking.

The latter is well known for blaming human activity for every change to the environment — a stance seemingly based on the assumption that the environment never changes naturally and/or that we fully understand every natural force which might make it change. By this logic any and every deviation must be man-made.. . ."


A sensitive matter
The climate may be heating up less in response to greenhouse-gas emissions than was once thought. But that does not mean the problem is going away
A sensitive matter

"OVER the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar. The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO₂ put there by humanity since 1750. And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, “the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.”

Temperatures fluctuate over short periods, but this lack of new warming is a surprise. Ed Hawkins, of the University of Reading, in Britain, points out that surface temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the range of projections derived from 20 climate models (see chart 1). If they remain flat, they will fall outside the models’ range within a few years.. . .
 
Were talking geological time periods where instants are measured in eons.
When discussing rapid warming caused by mankind's actions? No we aren't. That's literally the entire reason scientists are concerned. You know, the scientists who taught you everything and anything you know and ever will know about climate. This is a basic fact of this topic that a grown man like you should not be ignorant of.

Here's a scientific fact for ya. If you don't soon get your head out of your ass you're liable to suffer from asphyxiation and die.
And the uneducated slob runs into a brick wall and throws a tantrum. This must be a day that ends in 'y'.
 
Nope. That hasn't been established.

It is just a theory.
Yes it has, as much as any scientific theory can be established.

By the way, when you call a scientific theory "just a theory" you embarrass yourself. You really need to read up. There is no higher status a scientific explanation can attain.

And yes, when all of the evidence points in the same direction, it is established. You are invited to produce research that contradicts the current consensus. If you manage this, you will be very famous, as you would be the only person ever to do so.
 
Were talking geological time periods where instants are measured in eons.
When discussing rapid warming caused by mankind's actions? No we aren't. That's literally the entire reason scientists are concerned. You know, the scientists who taught you everything and anything you know and ever will know about climate. This is a basic fact of this topic that a grown man like you should not be ignorant of.

Here's a scientific fact for ya. If you don't soon get your head out of your ass you're liable to suffer from asphyxiation and die.
And the uneducated slob runs into a brick wall and throws a tantrum. This must be a day that ends in 'y'.

Uneducated or un brainwashed? I have a math, science and engineering background (including geodesy) so what's yours dumbass, gay art history?
 
Nope. That hasn't been established.

It is just a theory.
Yes it has, as much as any scientific theory can be established.

By the way, when you call a scientific theory "just a theory" you embarrass yourself. You really need to read up. There is no higher status a scientific explanation can attain.

And yes, when all of the evidence points in the same direction, it is established. You are invited to produce research that contradicts the current consensus. If you manage this, you will be very famous, as you would be the only person ever to do so.


False
Most of the scientific community does not agree
97% of a small handpicked group believes.
Just believes, Like any other religion .

There is zero scientific evidence to support your nonsense.
 
View attachment 305395 There's no denying it now.

The Antarctic Peninsula recorded a high of 65 degrees this week, the hottest temperature ever recorded there.

The reading was taken Thursday at Esperanza Base along Antarctica's Trinity Peninsula.

Antarctica hits warmest temperature ever recorded

Antarctica logs hottest temperature on record of 18.3C
Too funny;

A high pressure center being blocked from moving is the reason for the warm temperature...Damn weather events any way...
 
Most of the scientific community does not agree
Lie. The consensus among climate scientists, geologists, and oceanographers sits at about 98% percent, same as evolutionary theory among biologists.

97% of a small handpicked group believes
False. 97% of the published scientific research for the last few decades states agreement with the current consensus. The other 3% states no opinion. The percentage of research stating conclusions at odds with the current consensus is 0%.

I see you get your science news from the fat cancer boy.
 
Most of the scientific community does not agree

Lie. The consensus among climate scientists, geologists, and oceanographers sits at about 98% percent, same as evolutionary theory among biologists.

97% of a small handpicked group believes
False. 97% of the published scientific research for the last few decades states agreement with the current consensus. The other 3% states no opinion. The percentage of research stating conclusions at odds with the current consensus is 0%.

I see you get your science news from the fat cancer boy.

You
Are
An
Idiot.
 
Uneducated or un brainwashed?
Uneducated, and the rest doesn't matter. No, you will not be upending mountains of empirical evidence with your crybabying. This isn't religious horseshit, this is science.

No it's pure unadulterated BULLSHIT!
Now get back to and answer the first question since when and the second question what's your background. Otherwise STFU.
 

Forum List

Back
Top