Finally, an Unbiased and Objective Climate Science Report

[Toddsterpatriot]

Saying that there are some flaws in determining whether man made global climate change is a valid event is not the same as saying man made global climate change is not a valid event

Using flawed findings to destroy our economy is a bad idea.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Epic Fail as you didn't address the post one articles content.

It remains unchallenged.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

New survey of climate scientists by Bray and von Storch confirms broad consensus on human causation
by Bart Verheggen
Bray and von Storch just published the results of their latest survey of climate scientists. It contains lots of interesting and very detailed information, though some questions are a little biased in my opinion. Still, they find a strong consensus on human causation of climate change: 87.4% of respondents are to some extent convinced that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, the result of anthropogenic causes (question v007). Responses were given on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much). In line with Bray (2010) a response between 5 and 7 is considered agreement with anthropogenic causation. In their 2008 survey the level of agreement based on the same question was 83.5% and in 2013 it was 80.9%.

87.4% of respondents are to some extent convinced

Yeah, but are they $76 trillion convinced?

 

[Sunsettommy]

That isn't a challenge it is an irrelevant consensus statement.

Post one article remains unchallenged.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Using flawed findings to destroy our economy is a bad idea.

Customer-driven clean energy procurement, not regulation, is driving decarbonization

In 2022, voluntary renewable energy procurement deals by corporate and institutional customers were equivalent to 70% of the carbon-free energy capacity added to the grid.

www.utilitydive.com

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

87.4% of respondents are to some extent convinced

Yeah, but are they $76 trillion convinced?

Customer-driven clean energy procurement, not regulation, is driving decarbonization

In 2022, voluntary renewable energy procurement deals by corporate and institutional customers were equivalent to 70% of the carbon-free energy capacity added to the grid.

www.utilitydive.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How much would the anomaly be if we spent $76 trillion to fix it?

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

That isn't a challenge it is an irrelevant consensus statement.

Post one article remains unchallenged.

American Geophysical Union
"Based on extensive scientific evidence, it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. There is no alterative explanation supported by convincing evidence." (2019)5

AGU emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019)6

AMA emblem
American Meteorological Society
"Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades ... The IPCC (2013), USGCRP (2017), and USGCRP (2018) indicate that it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-twentieth century." (2019)7

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Customer-driven clean energy procurement, not regulation, is driving decarbonization

In 2022, voluntary renewable energy procurement deals by corporate and institutional customers were equivalent to 70% of the carbon-free energy capacity added to the grid.

www.utilitydive.com

How much did Ford and GM lose on EVs in 2024?

 

[Sunsettommy]

See how revealing it to see how they can't address the content of post one at all, they avoid by posting irrelevant replies such as consensus claims which has NOTHING to do with the content of post one article.

It is clear they have no rebuttal to offer just a bunch of meaningless replies is the best they can do.

That is the failure of the climate cultist who are out there in the wasteland of consensus and ideology.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

87.4% of respondents are to some extent convinced

Yeah, but are they $76 trillion convinced?

American Geophysical Union
"Based on extensive scientific evidence, it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. There is no alterative explanation supported by convincing evidence." (2019)5

AGU emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019)6

AMA emblem
American Meteorological Society
"Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades ... The IPCC (2013), USGCRP (2017), and USGCRP (2018) indicate that it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-twentieth century." (2019)7

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

See how revealing it to see how they can't address the content of post one at all, they avoid by posting irrelevant replies such as consensus claims which has NOTHING to do with the content of post one article.

It is clear they have no rebuttal to offer just a bunch of meaningless replies is the best they can do.

That is the failure of the climate cultist who are out there in the wasteland of consensus and ideology.

Does the source matter?

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

See how revealing it to see how they can't address the content of post one at all, they avoid by posting irrelevant replies such as consensus claims which has NOTHING to do with the content of post one article.

It is clear they have no rebuttal to offer just a bunch of meaningless replies is the best they can do.

That is the failure of the climate cultist who are out there in the wasteland of consensus and ideology.

 

[Sunsettommy]

American Geophysical Union
"Based on extensive scientific evidence, it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. There is no alterative explanation supported by convincing evidence." (2019)5

AGU emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019)6

AMA emblem
American Meteorological Society
"Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades ... The IPCC (2013), USGCRP (2017), and USGCRP (2018) indicate that it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-twentieth century." (2019)7

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Epic fail as again YOU can't address the CONTENT of the post one article because you have no evidence to offer against it, just your stupid repeated consensus argument.

Science research doesn't run on consensus they run on data and hypothesis.

You are being exposed as anti science which make your pseudoscience opinions worthless.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

American Geophysical Union
"Based on extensive scientific evidence, it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. There is no alterative explanation supported by convincing evidence." (2019)5

AGU emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2019)6

AMA emblem
American Meteorological Society
"Research has found a human influence on the climate of the past several decades ... The IPCC (2013), USGCRP (2017), and USGCRP (2018) indicate that it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-twentieth century." (2019)7

And that proves we should waste...err...invest $76 trillion on carbon-free energy.

How much of that should be spent on nuclear energy?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Still no rebuttal to the content of post one article.

Do you know what a rebuttal is?

• The process of presenting a counterargument to someone else's claims. In essence, a rebuttal is a critical component in debates and discussions, allowing one to challenge opposing viewpoints effectively.

You haven't once produced one.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

87.4% of respondents are to some extent convinced

Yeah, but are they $76 trillion convinced?

1. Share up-to-date facts about the price of wind and solar energy
For many decades, producing electricity from renewable sources was expensive. So it’s understandable that your colleagues and friends would express concern about the costs. You can make them aware that for utilities, the price of producing electricity from renewable sources has plunged dramatically, rewriting old assumptions about how to tackle the climate problem. In fact, between 2010 and 2019, the cost of offshore wind fell by 29%, onshore wind by 40%, and utility-scale solar photovoltaics by an astonishing 82%, according to the International Renewable Energy Association.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

And that proves we should waste...err...invest $76 trillion on carbon-free energy.

How much of that should be spent on nuclear energy?

$76 trillion? Link?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

1. Share up-to-date facts about the price of wind and solar energy
For many decades, producing electricity from renewable sources was expensive. So it’s understandable that your colleagues and friends would express concern about the costs. You can make them aware that for utilities, the price of producing electricity from renewable sources has plunged dramatically, rewriting old assumptions about how to tackle the climate problem. In fact, between 2010 and 2019, the cost of offshore wind fell by 29%, onshore wind by 40%, and utility-scale solar photovoltaics by an astonishing 82%, according to the International Renewable Energy Association.

What is the price of solar energy at midnight?

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

And that proves we should waste...err...invest $76 trillion on carbon-free energy.

How much of that should be spent on nuclear energy?

$76 trillion? Do you have a credible source for that?