Are Warmers a Doomsday Cult?

[RWatt]

So, it cannot be reproduced in a controlled laboratory environment, yet the warmists proclaim, with absolute pseudo-scientific certitude, that it's happening in the entirely uncontrolled and uncontrollable planetary environment!

You sure you didn't chime in here to give Frank more evidence of how much he's right?

You may not be able to create the entire environment in a lab, but we know the properties of CO2 and that the levels are rising. What sort of "oddball" logic tells you that can have a cause, but not the effect?!?! Pseudo-science of THAT kind is part and parcel of the skeptic/denier milieu, but wouldn't get them the time of day in a real academic environment. Their sort of "scientific" analysis only works on the internet where many readers aren't scientifically sophisticated enough to know they're being BSed.

Wait a minute...How do you know all this for certain if you cannot reproduce your results?

BTW, correlation still doesn't equal causation, no matter how many IPCC junk scientists and political hacks you throw out there.

How did scientists land man on the moon when they hadn't done that already in a lab?

The answer is they solve pieces of the problem in the lab and then stitch the pieces together with theory to figure out the overall problem that won't fit in a lab.

 

[Oddball]

No...Pilots landed on the moon, after numerous manned and unmanned spacecraft had previously made the journey.

 

[RWatt]

Of course because the moon landers were just satellites with people in them....

satellites which could come back to earth...

and carried oxygen and shielding from radiation...

 

[daveman]

Of course because the moon landers were just satellites with people in them....

satellites which could come back to earth...

and carried oxygen and shielding from radiation...

All the hardware was tested in the lab.

 

[RWatt]

Of course because the moon landers were just satellites with people in them....

satellites which could come back to earth...

and carried oxygen and shielding from radiation...

All the hardware was tested in the lab.

Was the fully assembled lander tested in a lab descending 1000 feet in reduced gravity and in a vacuum, onto a surface resembling the moon?

 

[The Gadfly]

Whee, a gathering of wingnuts. Of course, the fact that the whole of the scientific community states that the idiocy that you retards are pushing is total fabrication will never have any effect on your opinions.

First of all, it's NOT "the whole of the scientific community". The more honest among them admit that the theories involve some pretty far-reaching assumptions about climatic processes not fully understood. Second, if your assertion were true, why "Climategate"? Why fudge numbers; why suppress data that fails to support the desired conclusion? Why try to keep other data that does not support the desired conclusion out of sight, and out of publication in peer-reviewed journals? Do you deny this deliberate and malicious perversion of science for political ends? WELL, DO YOU?? So much for credibility. After that demonstration of "integrity" I wouldn't believe a damn thing "scientists" like that said, if they had God and a mile high-mountain of data to back them up. Damn liars! Of coursed, academia is so packed with liberals and out-and-out commies and other far-left loons, that nothing that comes out of it, however ridiculous, or how big a lie, surprises me at all. And the foremost, best-know political advocate for this loony cult of Chicken Littles: Al "I invented the internet" Gore, Prince of Liars, who has told so many whoppers that he could not recognize the truth, if it bit him in the arse!

This would be ludicrous, if the political objective of it were not to put us all back with the Third World; having failed to bring these losers up to civilized standards, liberals now want us to abandon our system, and join them in misery. To hell with the Third World; let 'em starve! Give me one reason why I should care a fig what happens to them.

 

[wirebender]

Nope.

The far right has just spent more than the far left on their propaganda machine, and the brain washing is working.

If you believe that, then the propaganda machine of the left has truely done its job on you. The warmists have outspent skeptics by a factor of about 1000:1. It just goes to show that it costs a great deal of money to try and make the truth out of a lie. You have outspent us 1000:1 and your message is still failing.

 

[xsited1]

Are Warmers a Doomsday Cult?

Their messiah will return with a hockey stick.

 

[Toronado3800]

Nope.

The far right has just spent more than the far left on their propaganda machine, and the brain washing is working.

If you believe that, then the propaganda machine of the left has truely done its job on you. The warmists have outspent skeptics by a factor of about 1000:1. It just goes to show that it costs a great deal of money to try and make the truth out of a lie. You have outspent us 1000:1 and your message is still failing.

Greenpeace is a bigger corporation than Exxon last time I looked lol.

 

[daveman]

Of course because the moon landers were just satellites with people in them....

satellites which could come back to earth...

and carried oxygen and shielding from radiation...

All the hardware was tested in the lab.

Was the fully assembled lander tested in a lab descending 1000 feet in reduced gravity and in a vacuum, onto a surface resembling the moon?

No, it wasn't tested under real conditions. Just like AGW.

 

[Old Rocks]

Seems to me that the theory of AGW not only has been tested under real conditions, but is proving itself under those conditions. In fact, it was developed because of trying to understand those very real conditions.

From Joseph Fourier measuring the albedo of the earth and finding that there had to be something in the atmosphere that intercepted and retained some of the reflected energy in order to account for the present temperature at the surface, to Tyndall measuring the absorption spectra of CO2 and other GHGs, it is scientists that are doing actual observations and measuring that have developed the theory of AGW.

Arnnhenius quantified the affects of the GHGs and made some rather accurate predicitons concerning the warming of the atmosphere. And we are seeing that warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

Whee, a gathering of wingnuts. Of course, the fact that the whole of the scientific community states that the idiocy that you retards are pushing is total fabrication will never have any effect on your opinions.

First of all, it's NOT "the whole of the scientific community".

Really? Care to point out a Scientific Society, a National Academy of Science, or even a major University that states that AGW is not a fact? Even in Outer Slobovia?

The more honest among them admit that the theories involve some pretty far-reaching assumptions about climatic processes not fully understood.

Totally untrue. The scientists state that AGW is a fact because of the known effects of GHGs. As far as the climatic processes are concerned, you are correct. We don't yet know how rapid the effect will be, what kind of and how soon the feedbackst, particularly from the Artic, will kick in, and what kind of effects the warming will have on worldwide weather patterns, although I beleive the last 11 months have given us a foretaste of that.

Second, if your assertion were true, why "Climategate"?

Because of a spin put on natural human bitching at those that were bitching at them. Most of what was said about the so called 'climategate' was lies.

Why fudge numbers; why suppress data that fails to support the desired conclusion? Why try to keep other data that does not support the desired conclusion out of sight, and out of publication in peer-reviewed journals?

The people you are claiming did these things were totally exonerated by their peers.

Do you deny this deliberate and malicious perversion of science for political ends? WELL, DO YOU?? So much for credibility.

Of course I do. Them there damned glaciers and icecaps are just melting to irritate you wingnuts.

After that demonstration of "integrity" I wouldn't believe a damn thing "scientists" like that said, if they had God and a mile high-mountain of data to back them up. Damn liars! Of coursed, academia is so packed with liberals and out-and-out commies and other far-left loons, that nothing that comes out of it, however ridiculous, or how big a lie, surprises me at all. And the foremost, best-know political advocate for this loony cult of Chicken Littles: Al "I invented the internet" Gore, Prince of Liars, who has told so many whoppers that he could not recognize the truth, if it bit him in the arse!

LOL.So you resent anybody that has the gumption to actually study a subject.

This would be ludicrous, if the political objective of it were not to put us all back with the Third World; having failed to bring these losers up to civilized standards, liberals now want us to abandon our system, and join them in misery. To hell with the Third World; let 'em starve! Give me one reason why I should care a fig what happens to them.

Of course, you have no reason to care whatsoever about your fellow man, or your children, or anything but yourself. You are a very good 'Conservative'

 

[daveman]

Seems to me that the theory of AGW not only has been tested under real conditions, but is proving itself under those conditions. In fact, it was developed because of trying to understand those very real conditions.

From Joseph Fourier measuring the albedo of the earth and finding that there had to be something in the atmosphere that intercepted and retained some of the reflected energy in order to account for the present temperature at the surface, to Tyndall measuring the absorption spectra of CO2 and other GHGs, it is scientists that are doing actual observations and measuring that have developed the theory of AGW.

Arnnhenius quantified the affects of the GHGs and made some rather accurate predicitons concerning the warming of the atmosphere. And we are seeing that warming.

You serve your masters well and you will be rewarded.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Seems to me that the theory of AGW not only has been tested under real conditions, but is proving itself under those conditions. In fact, it was developed because of trying to understand those very real conditions.

From Joseph Fourier measuring the albedo of the earth and finding that there had to be something in the atmosphere that intercepted and retained some of the reflected energy in order to account for the present temperature at the surface, to Tyndall measuring the absorption spectra of CO2 and other GHGs, it is scientists that are doing actual observations and measuring that have developed the theory of AGW.

Arnnhenius quantified the affects of the GHGs and made some rather accurate predicitons concerning the warming of the atmosphere. And we are seeing that warming.

Oh it seems to you that it has? It that the acid test? "Yes, Jim, it seems that OR is satisfied, therefore we have both consensus AND settled science"

Why can't you Warmers show us a single laboratory experiment how a 60PPM increase generates a Cat 5 hurricane like you say it does?

 

[Oddball]

Seems to me that the theory of AGW not only has been tested under real conditions, but is proving itself under those conditions. In fact, it was developed because of trying to understand those very real conditions.

From Joseph Fourier measuring the albedo of the earth and finding that there had to be something in the atmosphere that intercepted and retained some of the reflected energy in order to account for the present temperature at the surface, to Tyndall measuring the absorption spectra of CO2 and other GHGs, it is scientists that are doing actual observations and measuring that have developed the theory of AGW.

Arnnhenius quantified the affects of the GHGs and made some rather accurate predicitons concerning the warming of the atmosphere. And we are seeing that warming.

Then we all get aboard the space ship hiding behind the Hale-Bopp comet!

 

[Toronado3800]

Seems to me that the theory of AGW not only has been tested under real conditions, but is proving itself under those conditions. In fact, it was developed because of trying to understand those very real conditions.

From Joseph Fourier measuring the albedo of the earth and finding that there had to be something in the atmosphere that intercepted and retained some of the reflected energy in order to account for the present temperature at the surface, to Tyndall measuring the absorption spectra of CO2 and other GHGs, it is scientists that are doing actual observations and measuring that have developed the theory of AGW.

Arnnhenius quantified the affects of the GHGs and made some rather accurate predicitons concerning the warming of the atmosphere. And we are seeing that warming.

Oh it seems to you that it has? It that the acid test? "Yes, Jim, it seems that OR is satisfied, therefore we have both consensus AND settled science"

Why can't you Warmers show us a single laboratory experiment how a 60PPM increase generates a Cat 5 hurricane like you say it does?

Frank, global warming will largely not create hurricanes. They may have stronger winds I suppose if one passes over warmer water but it will take awhile to figure out "hurricanes are 3% stronger now".

If that is the case and the rise in air temperature does not offset the water temp increase.

Either way I dont expect a big increase in hurricanes. Perhaps we can get a shift in where they occur if enough ice melts to change ocean currents.

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[The Gadfly]

Whee, a gathering of wingnuts. Of course, the fact that the whole of the scientific community states that the idiocy that you retards are pushing is total fabrication will never have any effect on your opinions.

First of all, it's NOT "the whole of the scientific community".

Really? Care to point out a Scientific Society, a National Academy of Science, or even a major University that states that AGW is not a fact? Even in Outer Slobovia?

The more honest among them admit that the theories involve some pretty far-reaching assumptions about climatic processes not fully understood.

Totally untrue. The scientists state that AGW is a fact because of the known effects of GHGs. As far as the climatic processes are concerned, you are correct. We don't yet know how rapid the effect will be, what kind of and how soon the feedbackst, particularly from the Artic, will kick in, and what kind of effects the warming will have on worldwide weather patterns, although I beleive the last 11 months have given us a foretaste of that.

Second, if your assertion were true, why "Climategate"?

Because of a spin put on natural human bitching at those that were bitching at them. Most of what was said about the so called 'climategate' was lies.

Why fudge numbers; why suppress data that fails to support the desired conclusion? Why try to keep other data that does not support the desired conclusion out of sight, and out of publication in peer-reviewed journals?

The people you are claiming did these things were totally exonerated by their peers.

Do you deny this deliberate and malicious perversion of science for political ends? WELL, DO YOU?? So much for credibility.

Of course I do. Them there damned glaciers and icecaps are just melting to irritate you wingnuts.

After that demonstration of "integrity" I wouldn't believe a damn thing "scientists" like that said, if they had God and a mile high-mountain of data to back them up. Damn liars! Of coursed, academia is so packed with liberals and out-and-out commies and other far-left loons, that nothing that comes out of it, however ridiculous, or how big a lie, surprises me at all. And the foremost, best-know political advocate for this loony cult of Chicken Littles: Al "I invented the internet" Gore, Prince of Liars, who has told so many whoppers that he could not recognize the truth, if it bit him in the arse!

LOL.So you resent anybody that has the gumption to actually study a subject.

This would be ludicrous, if the political objective of it were not to put us all back with the Third World; having failed to bring these losers up to civilized standards, liberals now want us to abandon our system, and join them in misery. To hell with the Third World; let 'em starve! Give me one reason why I should care a fig what happens to them.

Of course, you have no reason to care whatsoever about your fellow man, or your children, or anything but yourself. You are a very good 'Conservative'

So those whose careers depend on their acceptance by the academic Left parrot the views the academic Left likes? I am so shocked! *sarcasm*.

On the second point, maybe you could tell us why AGW accounts for the FACT that around 900-1200 , the Vikings found Greenland actually WAS green. Where were the Greenland glaciers then? Oh, that's right, those came LATER. Ever thought of a NATURAL climate cycle? Whoops, can't have that, doesn't fit the "new religion"! Heresy! Out with it (and any other data we don't like)! Never let facts get in the way of a good lie; that's the Marxist way, right?

Climategate "lies"? Oh, really? So no one suppressed data that didn't fit? No one tried to prevent opposing view from being published? "The evil conservatives fabricated the whole thing"? Yeah, right! Do you believe in the Tooth Fairy, too, or does the Church of Trotsky not require that?

Exonerated by their peers? See, that's the problem; that's like trying the Nazis in a Nazi court under Nazi law, with a Nazi judge and jury (Hell, Eichmann would have been "exonerated" by that standard; so would Goering!). If that's too harsh, try this one: that's like letting the fox, the weasel, and the chicken hawk decide who raided the henhouse. "Henhouse? WHAT henhouse? I didn't see you, you didn't see me, and we didn't see a thing, judge!"

"So you resent anybody who has the gumption to actually study a subject?" No, I resent anyone willing to pervert that study for political ends and a predetermined conclusion.

"Of course you have no reason to care whatsoever about your fellow man, or your children, or anything but yourself...".

As a matter of fact, after a lifetime of caring and giving, my generosity and compassion has been exhausted (and abused) with no discernible result. Here's a quarter, call Al Gore. HIS "carbon footprint" is five times the size of mine, but hey, he "cares".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And now we learn that a 60PPM increase in CO2 is killing the coral in the oceans.

How?

We just don't know! There's less than no science behind it. What we know about science tell us its physically impossible for it to work like that, but never mind that.

It seems that way to the EnviroMarxist Doomsday Cultists known as the Warmers,so it must be true