Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
How did what I wrote in post #60 ignore human contribution?
The data is from the paleoclimate community. This work was performed to understand the geology of the planet. It's not controversial data. I'm not attacking anyone. I'm attacking flawed models and flawed science.So you are using the empirical climate data from the geologic record ? Where did that data come from? How can you trust that data if it's produced by the very same people you're attacking?
Only if you take it out of context from the complete statement."But there's no money to be made off of that because no one has the stomach to swallow that medicine or the courage to speak out about it." -- that's a seriously crazy argument.
But then again, you have so much courage to go with your knowledge.
There isn't one science based argument that you can make that I haven't though of and considered. Not one. So I'm really looking forward to your continued participation in the environmental forum. Your participation makes it a target rich environment."But there's no money to be made off of that because no one has the stomach to swallow that medicine or the courage to speak out about it." -- that's a seriously crazy argument.
But then again, you have so much courage to go with your knowledge.
Did you know you can read the temperature threshold for glaciation at each pole straight from the oxygen isotope curve?"But there's no money to be made off of that because no one has the stomach to swallow that medicine or the courage to speak out about it." -- that's a seriously crazy argument.
But then again, you have so much courage to go with your knowledge.
The empirical climate data from the geologic record shows that during glacial periods there can be warming trends and that during interglacial period there can be cooling trends. See all that saw tooth behavior? Those are climate fluctuations. You know... like the one we are experiencing now that you are convinced it's because of CO2. It's not. It's just more of the same climate variations that have been going ever since the planet transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet."And this is looking not as extreme as we've seen in some recent years, like the record low in 2012," okay
your arguments here seem more about poor little picked on industrialized nations being blamed, for the evils of industrialized or emerging nations.There isn't one science based argument that you can make that I haven't though of and considered. Not one. So I'm really looking forward to your continued participation in the environmental forum. Your participation makes it a target rich environment.
bellona.org
what is your argument? What are you trying to prove here? Are you a climate scientist or a Keyboard scientist?Did you know you can read the temperature threshold for glaciation at each pole straight from the oxygen isotope curve?
It's actually really easy. Would you like to try?
View attachment 751076
you ranted and raved about a chart showing something about 2007. Then I see a low lower than 2007 in 2012? Kerry was speaking of the “Ice Free Arctic Summer” and not “ Ice Free Arctic” ... you appear to be saying it's all nothing to worry about, when the source/export you're hiding behind does not take that stance
You're a Keyboard Expert here.
No. My argument was that CO2 is not responsible for catastrophic global warming. What future warming they are predicting will be much less than they claim because water vapor isn't a net positive feedback, it's a net negative feedback. AND any warming that is due to man is primarily from deforestation and urbanization which affects the albedo of the planet.your arguments here seem more about poor little picked on industrialized nations being blamed, for the evils of industrialized or emerging nations.
I'm curious: what do your rants about the GHG effect of CO2 have to do with Kerry's speech?
A melting Arctic is driving up carbon dioxide emissions, new US government report says - Bellona.org
The Arctic is undergoing a profound and rapid shift into a new condition, one that is greener, features less ice, warmer temperatures and which emits greenhouse gasses on par with several industrial nations due to melting permafrost, according to a new US government report released this week.
My argument is that they have falsely attributed a natural warming event - which the geologic record is littered with - to atmospheric CO2. And that their predictions are exaggerated because they incorrectly model the affects of water vapor which according to their models triples the warming from CO2.what is your argument? What are you trying to prove here? Are you a climate scientist or a Keyboard scientist?
"And this is looking not as extreme as we've seen in some recent years, like the record low in 2012," okay
your arguments here seem more about poor little picked on industrialized nations being blamed, for the evils of industrialized or emerging nations.There isn't one science based argument that you can make that I haven't though of and considered. Not one. So I'm really looking forward to your continued participation in the environmental forum. Your participation makes it a target rich environment.
Remember Ole FrankenKerry?
I think he's bought 6 more ocean front beach houses since this with all the money he laundered from Ukraine.
Have the left ever been right about anything? What?
Inhofe added that he believes "the ones that were responsible for the whole global warming movement was the United Nations." And even though the scientific research into climate change actually helps to explain the unusual weather patterns behind the recent arctic chill in much of the U.S., Inhofe seems to think that the cold weather actually supports his theory, apparently because it, too, makes a good anecdote. Those ships trapped in the antarctic ice also make a good anecdote for Inhofe, because one of the vessels was carrying scientists who were researching the effects of climate change. Funny!
www.theatlantic.com
snapshot in time.It was indeed low that year but hasn't been close to that low ever since:
the decline has stopped but as at a lower level than in the 1990's.
your arguments here seem more about poor little picked on industrialized nations being blamed, for the evils of industrialized or emerging nations.
I'm curious: what do your rants about the GHG effect of CO2 have to do with Kerry's speech?
“‘Climate change is real’ is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes occur all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural ‘noise.’” -- Senator James Inhofe
It's Pretty Cold, So Senator Inhofe is Rambling About Climate Change
With the Polar Vortex threatening us all this week, Senator Jim Inhofe took to the Senate floor on Monday to run through just about every reason he personally does not think climate change is a real thing.
you're far too much like Senator InhofeI disagree. My argument is what I have been telling you it is for the last 3 posts.
In ten years their prediction of sea level rise tripling will be proven wrong. In 30 years everything will be proven wrong by colder temperatures because climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty are hallmarks of our bipolar glaciated world.snapshot in time.
in twenty years will it have stayed stop? Not sure of your logic here
I'm more like Tigger. I'm the only one.you're far too much like Senator Inhofe
Remember Ole FrankenKerry?
I think he's bought 6 more ocean front beach houses since this with all the money he laundered from Ukraine.
Have the left ever been right about anything? What?
