Doomsday climate predictions no longer plausible!!

[skookerasbil]

d0y

No elaboration needed, except to say...more AGW k00k lOsiNg

The worst-case climate scenarios are no longer plausible today

 

[psikeyhackr]

4° C isn't plausible but 3° C is OK. LOL

 

[luiza]

Solar Cycle 25 data suggests that those worried about high temperature are seriously mis informed .

They are babbling about what increasingly is looking like nonsense .

DYOR

 

[Crick]

Solar Cycle 25 data suggests that those worried about high temperature are seriously mis informed .

They are babbling about what increasingly is looking like nonsense .

DYOR

No one in mainstream science is worried about heating from TSI.

 

[skookerasbil]

No one in mainstream science is worried about heating from TSI.

But it conforms with public statements made by the IPCC...yeah...so...fAiL.

Since you immerse yourself only in the bought science of the Climate Change Industry, you wouldn't know.

 

[Crick]

Yes, the IPCC did note that TSI was falling. You think that's a hit on AGW?

How much has the fossil fuel industry spent trying to convince you to doubt mainstream science?

How the oil industry has spent billions to control the climate change conversation

Activists say Democratic climate proposals won’t be able to pass until lawmakers put a stop to oil companies trying to rebrand themselves

www.theguardian.com

Oil And Gas Giants Spend Millions Lobbying To Block Climate Change Policies [Infographic]

A recent report from InfluenceMap claims that the world's biggest oil and gas companies spend $200 million every year to weaken and oppose legislation aimed at fighting global warming.

www.forbes.com

The Oil and Gas Industry’s Dangerous Answer to Climate Change

Companies are resorting to extreme measures to protect their own operations from the effects of climate change, even as their lobbyists stall reform.

www.americanprogress.org

 

[psikeyhackr]

But it conforms with public statements made by the IPCC...yeah...so...fAiL.

Since you immerse yourself only in the bought science of the Climate Change Industry, you wouldn't know.

So show us your history of satellite data.

Total Solar Irradiance Data | NCEI

Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) data available from the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information and collocated World Data Center for Solar-Terrestrial Physics. TSI is the total solar irradiance measured at the top of the Earth's atmosphere. Data include Arvesen's NASA research aircraft...

ngdc.noaa.gov

Everything that disagrees with you is a conspiracy.

 

[johngaltshrugged]

Climate change is a joke & they readily admit it is really about changing the economy.

It's a scam only the idiots & hopelessly indoctrinated still listen to

 

[Crick]

Climate change is a joke & they readily admit it is really about changing the economy.

It's a scam only the idiots & hopelessly indoctrinated still listen to

View attachment 747497

You're best science info comes from cartoons. And globalism is the ultimate evil. God made this planet with borders and he intends us to keep them.

 

[Dekster]

I learned to be skeptical of scientific claims when being taught, of all things, science. It was considered necessary. These days it must be "Go with whatever conclusion services your agenda" being taught.

 

[skookerasbil]

IPCC said years ago...

"Cannot predict the future climate based upon computer models"

All you AGW nutters be like....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

d0y

No elaboration needed, except to say...more AGW k00k lOsiNg

The worst-case climate scenarios are no longer plausible today

Oh nose!

 

[Crick]

I learned to be skeptical of scientific claims when being taught, of all things, science. It was considered necessary. These days it must be "Go with whatever conclusion services your agenda" being taught.

Why?

Global warming presents an existential threat to the fossil fuel industry. That has convinced them to do whatever they can to slow the acceptance of AGW science and the adoption of mitigation measures that might harm their sales. Investigations had already shown Exxon, Shell and Mobil having spent hundreds of millions of dollars to convince folks like you that climate science was highly suspect: scientifically (ie, that it was invalid) and ethically (ie, that it was biased). Apparently since Al Gore was the early face of AGW concern and environmentalism has always had more support from liberals than conservatives, the fossil fuel PR folks capitalized on that as an edge to work their way in with conservatives and have convinced you that liberals want to send us back to the stoneage by eliminating your supply of diesel to power the Cummins turbo V-10 you use to get to McDonalds and back. The accusations commonly made by AGW deniers fail basic sanity tests so it has always astounded me that folks putting out basic science arguments should run into such tremendous resistance. But they do. Go figger. Please.

 

[Dekster]

Why?

Global warming presents an existential threat to the fossil fuel industry. That has convinced them to do whatever they can to slow the acceptance of AGW science and the adoption of mitigation measures that might harm their sales. Investigations had already shown Exxon, Shell and Mobil having spent hundreds of millions of dollars to convince folks like you that climate science was highly suspect: scientifically (ie, that it was invalid) and ethically (ie, that it was biased). Apparently since Al Gore was the early face of AGW concern and environmentalism has always had more support from liberals than conservatives, the fossil fuel PR folks capitalized on that as an edge to work their way in with conservatives and have convinced you that liberals want to send us back to the stoneage by eliminating your supply of diesel to power the Cummins turbo V-10 you use to get to McDonalds and back. The accusations commonly made by AGW deniers fail basic sanity tests so it has always astounded me that folks putting out basic science arguments should run into such tremendous resistance. But they do. Go figger. Please.

People used to think the earth was flat and was the center of the universe. That is why.

 

[Crick]

People used to think the earth was flat and was the center of the universe. That is why.

That addresses absolutely nothing I asked you about.

 

[Dekster]

That addresses absolutely nothing I asked you about.

You asked why. I told you. Sorry if facts get in the way of your agenda, but at least you prove my original point quite nicely. Science changes. Science changes constantly. If you aren't a skeptic of the status quo "knowledge", you shouldn't be in science.

 

[Crick]

You asked why. I told you. Sorry if facts get in the way of your agenda, but at least you prove my original point quite nicely. Science changes. Science changes constantly. If you aren't a skeptic of the status quo "knowledge", you shouldn't be in science.

So, do you reject the heliocentric theory? The germ theory of disease? The existence of viruses? Special or General Relativity? Quantum field theory? Theory of evolution? The cell theory? Atomic theory? The kinetic theory of gases? Do you go through your day-to-day life acting as if any of these are actually true? I'm betting you do.

 

[Dekster]

So, do you reject the heliocentric theory? The germ theory of disease? The existence of viruses? Special or General Relativity? Quantum field theory? Theory of evolution? The cell theory? Atomic theory? The kinetic theory of gases? Do you go through your day-to-day life acting as if any of these are actually true? I'm betting you do.

You are free to make any bets you want. You know they call them "theories" for a reason....

 

[ding]

Yes, the IPCC did note that TSI was falling. You think that's a hit on AGW?

How much has the fossil fuel industry spent trying to convince you to doubt mainstream science?

How the oil industry has spent billions to control the climate change conversation

Activists say Democratic climate proposals won’t be able to pass until lawmakers put a stop to oil companies trying to rebrand themselves

www.theguardian.com

Oil And Gas Giants Spend Millions Lobbying To Block Climate Change Policies [Infographic]

A recent report from InfluenceMap claims that the world's biggest oil and gas companies spend $200 million every year to weaken and oppose legislation aimed at fighting global warming.

www.forbes.com

The Oil and Gas Industry’s Dangerous Answer to Climate Change

Companies are resorting to extreme measures to protect their own operations from the effects of climate change, even as their lobbyists stall reform.

www.americanprogress.org

 

[Crick]

You are free to make any bets you want. You know they call them "theories" for a reason....

A theory is a carefully thought-out explanation for observations of the natural world that has been constructed using the scientific method, and which brings together many facts and hypotheses. --https://www.fieldmuseum.org/blog/what-do-we-mean-theory-science

---

In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts. --https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution-today/what-is-a-theory

---

scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3]

1. National Academy of Sciences (US) (1999). Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences (2nd ed.). National Academies Press. p. 2. doi:10.17226/6024. ISBN 978-0-309-06406-4. PMID 25101403.
2. ^ Jump up to:a b Winther, Rasmus G. (2016). "The Structure of Scientific Theories". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
3. ^ Jump up to:a b Schafersman, Steven D. "An Introduction to Science".

Scientific theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

---

Anyone making comments akin to "it's just theory" or that theories are just guesses is simply admitting that they have no familiarity with basic science.