Bombshell study concludes there is no evidence for anthropogenic climate change...

[alang1216]

Of course it matters. Why wouldn't it matter? Either it is due to natural climate fluctuations which we can do nothing about or it's due to man's influence which we can do something about.

Why do you assume that we can't do anything about natural climate fluctuations?

 

[ding]

Yes,


I've always accepted that there are multiple causes but I'm not knowledgeable enough to rank their importance.

And if those multiple causes are natural there is nothing we can do about it, right?

 

[ding]

Why do you assume that we can't do anything about natural climate fluctuations?

Because we can't control the weather.

 

[ding]

I know the consensus and I accept it is a factor. I also don't see it matters if they are right or not.

But you don't know the argument against the consensus. You have blindly accepted the consensus without any investigation. You don't understand that their argument for catastrophic temperature increases is based solely on computer modeling which predicts a net positive feedback which is 2 to 3 times the GHG effect of CO2 which is where the disagreement lies. Water vapor isn't a net positive feedback. Water vapor is a net negative feedback which is why the planet cooled for 50 million years with atmospheric CO2 of 600 ppm.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I would trust him to direct a movie. Nothing more.

Michael Kenneth Mann is an American director, screenwriter, and producer of film and television who is best known for his distinctive style of crime drama. His most acclaimed works include the films Thief, Manhunter, The Last of the Mohicans, Heat, The Insider, Collateral, and Public Enemies.

The pudgy fraud........

 

[alang1216]

And if those multiple causes are natural there is nothing we can do about it, right?

Completely, absolutely wrong.

 

[alang1216]

Because we can't control the weather.

Climate and weather are not the same. Some Harvard folk have some ideas on the subject:

Reversing Climate Change with Geoengineering​

 

[alang1216]

But you don't know the argument against the consensus. You have blindly accepted the consensus without any investigation. You don't understand that their argument for catastrophic temperature increases is based solely on computer modeling which predicts a net positive feedback which is 2 to 3 times the GHG effect of CO2 which is where the disagreement lies. Water vapor isn't a net positive feedback. Water vapor is a net negative feedback which is why the planet cooled for 50 million years with atmospheric CO2 of 600 ppm.

You tell the climatologists, they don't seem to know what you know.

 

[alang1216]

The pudgy fraud........

View attachment 747237

Oh that guy. What fraud?

NSF’s inspector general released the conclusion of its inquiry into allegations against Mann regarding research misconduct. The five page summary is below in Grist. It says it could find, on its own and in files of a university-based team that did a previous inspection, nothing that constitutes research misconduct. It also said subsidiary allegations of failure at proper data sharing have no discernible merit. That makes it a clean sweep for Mann – a series of investigations found nothing worth a hoot.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Oh that guy. What fraud?

NSF’s inspector general released the conclusion of its inquiry into allegations against Mann regarding research misconduct. The five page summary is below in Grist. It says it could find, on its own and in files of a university-based team that did a previous inspection, nothing that constitutes research misconduct. It also said subsidiary allegations of failure at proper data sharing have no discernible merit. That makes it a clean sweep for Mann – a series of investigations found nothing worth a hoot.

You know, adding actual temperature data to proxy data, because the proxy data didn't look right.
You know, dragging out frivolous lawsuits and not turning over his data, his methods.
Not paying the legal fees the judge ordered him to pay. That fraud.

 

[alang1216]

You know, adding actual temperature data to proxy data, because the proxy data didn't look right.
You know, dragging out frivolous lawsuits and not turning over his data, his methods.
Not paying the legal fees the judge ordered him to pay. That fraud.

You conducted your own investigation? Neither did I, but I'll go with the National Science Foundation until I see reason not to.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You conducted your own investigation? Neither did I, but I'll go with the National Science Foundation until I see reason not to.

Maybe you can pitch in to help cover the legal judgement against him? For the science.

 

[alang1216]

Maybe you can pitch in to help cover the legal judgement against him? For the science.

I thought it was him doing the suing? Who is suing him?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I thought it was him doing the suing? Who is suing him?

When his lawsuit got to the discovery phase, he refused to turn over his data, his methods.
He stalled. For years. When the judge finally dismissed several of his cases, he was ordered to
pay the legal fees of a guy he sued. He hasn't paid yet.

He's a fraud and a deadbeat.

 

[alang1216]

When his lawsuit got to the discovery phase, he refused to turn over his data, his methods.
He stalled. For years. When the judge finally dismissed several of his cases, he was ordered to
pay the legal fees of a guy he sued. He hasn't paid yet.

He's a fraud and a deadbeat.

Deadbeat, yes. Fraud? No such finding.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Deadbeat, yes. Fraud? No such finding.

When the science is on your side, one of the first things you do is stop skeptics from getting published.

Can you believe he won the Nobel Prize?

 

[ding]

You tell the climatologists, they don't seem to know what you know.

They will discover it soon enough. Either through colder temperatures or failed predictions of catastrophe. There really is no other explanation for the transition from a greenhouse world to an icehouse world.

 

[ding]

Climate and weather are not the same. Some Harvard folk have some ideas on the subject:

Reversing Climate Change with Geoengineering​

Someone should tell them about D-O events which warmed much faster than today. And then someone should tell them that it's folly to believe that man can control the weather.

 

[ding]

Completely, absolutely wrong.

Tails don't wag dogs.

 

[alang1216]

They will discover it soon enough. Either through colder temperatures or failed predictions of catastrophe. There really is no other explanation for the transition from a greenhouse world to an icehouse world.

I hope we live to see an answer but I doubt I'll be around for it.