Further proof global warming is a hoax!

[Crick]

AGW theory, who's leading scientists say that their experiments need not be repeatable.

It takes a special breed of stupid to still believe what they say.

Hello stupid.

I'm quite certain you have no such quote from any "leading" climate scientist but it is common knowledge that not all experiments can be repeated or can be reasonably be done. Some obvious examples are an experiment that costs an enormous amount of money to conduct or one that requires a specific configuration of the universe (say, an eclipse or an occultation). The majority of climate science experiments involve processing specific data sets. Repeating the processing is easily done. What sort of experiments are you concerned about here?

 

[EMH]

melting ice sheets

This is one for the ages, this claim. Both Antarctica and Greenland, 97% of Earth ice, add a new layer of ice every year, which is why we get climate record from ice cores.

To your side, if an ice sheet adds a new layer of ice every year, somehow that is "melting."

Antarctica is a 40+ million year old ice age right on a pole. It is not melting. Not at all. Even what comes off of it, icebergs, are STILL FROZEN...

Greenland melts in the summer south of the Arctic Circle, just as NA did around Chicago...

 

[schmidlap]

This is one for the ages, this claim. Both Antarctica and Greenland, 97% of Earth ice, add a new layer of ice every year, which is why we get climate record from ice cores.

To your side, if an ice sheet adds a new layer of ice every year, somehow that is "melting."

Antarctica is a 40+ million year old ice age right on a pole. It is not melting. Not at all. Even what comes off of it, icebergs, are STILL FROZEN...

Greenland melts in the summer south of the Arctic Circle, just as NA did around Chicago...

You may find this illuminating:

One year in the next five will almost certainly be the hottest on record and there’s a two-in-three chance a single year will cross the crucial 1.5℃ global warming threshold, an alarming new report by the World Meteorological Organization predicts.​

​

The report, known as the Global Annual to Decadal Climate Update, warns if humanity fails to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero, increasingly worse heat records will tumble beyond this decade.​

​

So what is driving the bleak outlook for the next five years? An expected El Niño, on top of the overall global warming trend, will likely push the global temperature to record levels.​

​

Has the Paris Agreement already failed if the global average temperature exceeds the 1.5℃ threshold in one of the next five years? No, but it will be a stark warning of what’s in store if we don’t quickly reduce emissions to net zero.​

​

The World Meteorological Organization update says there is a 98% chance at least one of the next five years will be the hottest on record. And there’s a 66% chance of at least one year over the 1.5℃ threshold...​

​

Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions have already driven up global average temperatures by more than 1℃ since the late 19th century. The update notes the 2022 average global temperature was about 1.15℃ above the 1850-1900 average, despite the cooling influence of La Niña conditions. Temperatures are now rising by about 0.2℃ per decade.​

​

We now have more than a century of global mean temperature data. That means it should be getting harder, not easier, to achieve new records. If there was no trend, we would expect to see fewer records as time passes and the data we’ve collected better captures the full range of natural climate variability.​

​

Instead, because we are warming the world so quickly, more heat records are being set globally and at the local level. The human influence on the climate is pushing temperatures to unprecedented highs with alarming frequency...​

​

Almost all nations around the world have signed the Paris Agreement. The aim is to limit global warming to well below 2℃ and preferably below 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels.​

​

The prediction that an individual year above 1.5℃ global warming is more likely than not is alarming. But it doesn’t mean we have failed to achieve the Paris Agreement’s goals. The agreement aims to limit long-term global warming to a level that avoids major climate impacts, including ecosystem loss. One or two years that pop over the 1.5℃ level don’t constitute failure.​

​

However, the world is getting closer to the 1.5℃ global warming level due to our continuing high greenhouse gas emissions. The forecast of a probable year that exceeds that level should serve as a warning.​

​

​

​

 

[schmidlap]

AGW theory, who's leading scientists say that their experiments need not be repeatable.

It takes a special breed of stupid to still believe what they say.

Hello stupid.

The price of ideologically-driven willful ignorance is exorbitant.

Damaging severe storms are on the rise, with every year since 2011 experiencing at least six “billion-dollar” storms in the US. From 2001-2022, the US saw six times more billion-dollar storms than in the previous two decades, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA defines a billion-dollar extreme weather or climate event as one that is so destructive it results in at least $1 billion worth of damages. The storms are typically characterized by high winds, hailstorms, derechos, and tornados. The storms since 1980 account for 48% of all billion-dollar weather disasters in the US.​

​

Prior to 2011, the US saw an average of about two billion-dollar storms per year. That number was almost 10 per year from 2011 through 2022.​

​

The average annual cost of billon-dollar severe storms rose from $2.5 billion between 1980 and 2000, to $15.4 billion between 2001 and 2022. Since 2001, billion-dollar severe storms have caused an estimated $339 billion in damages and 1,358 fatalities in the U.S. (All data is adjusted for inflation.)​

[The number of billion-dollar disasters from severe US storms is on the rise]​

 

[OKTexas]

I have not appointed myself to remedy the situation, nor would I.

I recognize that virtually every nation on earth has acknowledged anthropogenic climate change, and its mitigation will be achieved by implementing remedial measures recognized as being effective by the scientific community.

Ideological paranoia toward virtually every nation on earth and the toward the scientific community will not change that.

So you're fucking clueless, GOT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now run along parrot.

.

 

[EMH]

You may find this illuminating:

One year in the next five will almost certainly be the hottest on record and there’s a two-in-three chance a single year will cross the crucial 1.5℃ global warming threshold, an alarming new report by the World Meteorological Organization predicts.​

​

The report, known as the Global Annual to Decadal Climate Update, warns if humanity fails to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero, increasingly worse heat records will tumble beyond this decade.​

​

So what is driving the bleak outlook for the next five years? An expected El Niño, on top of the overall global warming trend, will likely push the global temperature to record levels.​

​

Has the Paris Agreement already failed if the global average temperature exceeds the 1.5℃ threshold in one of the next five years? No, but it will be a stark warning of what’s in store if we don’t quickly reduce emissions to net zero.​

​

The World Meteorological Organization update says there is a 98% chance at least one of the next five years will be the hottest on record. And there’s a 66% chance of at least one year over the 1.5℃ threshold...​

​

Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions have already driven up global average temperatures by more than 1℃ since the late 19th century. The update notes the 2022 average global temperature was about 1.15℃ above the 1850-1900 average, despite the cooling influence of La Niña conditions. Temperatures are now rising by about 0.2℃ per decade.​

​

We now have more than a century of global mean temperature data. That means it should be getting harder, not easier, to achieve new records. If there was no trend, we would expect to see fewer records as time passes and the data we’ve collected better captures the full range of natural climate variability.​

​

Instead, because we are warming the world so quickly, more heat records are being set globally and at the local level. The human influence on the climate is pushing temperatures to unprecedented highs with alarming frequency...​

​

Almost all nations around the world have signed the Paris Agreement. The aim is to limit global warming to well below 2℃ and preferably below 1.5℃ above pre-industrial levels.​

​

The prediction that an individual year above 1.5℃ global warming is more likely than not is alarming. But it doesn’t mean we have failed to achieve the Paris Agreement’s goals. The agreement aims to limit long-term global warming to a level that avoids major climate impacts, including ecosystem loss. One or two years that pop over the 1.5℃ level don’t constitute failure.​

​

However, the world is getting closer to the 1.5℃ global warming level due to our continuing high greenhouse gas emissions. The forecast of a probable year that exceeds that level should serve as a warning.​

​

​

​

LOL!!


Your side has no real warming outside of Urban Heat Sink Effect - none, and even with that and increased Co2 the atmosphere is not warmig.

Fortunately, more and more are noticing the planet is not warming, the oceans are not rising, the canes are not increasing, and your side is losing the "credibility" it never had.

 

[schmidlap]

So you're fucking clueless, GOT IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now run along parrot.

.

If you labor under the delusion that your ideologically-driven claptrap is original thinking, you'd be very wrong.

What other scientific disciplines upset you? Herpetology? Crystallography? Proctology?

Some locales will be impacted more than others.

What will climate change cost you?

Florida, Texas, Central US could see biggest increase in hot days, new modeling shows​

​

What is First Street's report and where can you find it? ​

A peer-reviewed assessment and extreme heat model, it’s the latest in a series by First Street and its partners looking at warming-related risks in communities across the contiguous United States, including flooding, sea level rise and wildfire. The foundation and its partners put together federal weather records, property records, satellite information and other data for their model, using intermediate global climate projections. It also considered tree cover, paved surfaces and proximity to water. ​

​

The public can find the tool, Heat Factor, at RiskFactor.com and look at future property projections and trends over the past 30 years.​

​

Showing past trends should help build trust in the projections, Porter said, because people will see there are more hot days today and a higher probability of heat waves and dangerously hot days.​

 

[schmidlap]

LOL!!


Your side has no real warming outside of Urban Heat Sink Effect - none, and even with that and increased Co2 the atmosphere is not warmig.

Fortunately, more and more are noticing the planet is not warming, the oceans are not rising, the canes are not increasing, and your side is losing the "credibility" it never had.

I.e., virtually all nations and scientific institutions on earth.

In opposition:

 

[mamooth]

AGW theory, who's leading scientists say that their experiments need not be repeatable.

There are thousands of experiments quantifying the physical parameters of greenhouse gases.

Repeating the processing of statistical datasets can be done by anyone, and is quite repeatable. See, for example, the BEST experiment repeated the processing of other data sets, and got the same results. That caused a hysterical denier meltdown.

And AGW theory is repeatable by obervation study, which satisfies the requirements of hard science.

Only the most brainwashed cultists claim that controlled studies are required for mega-macro-phenomena. There are no duplicate earths do to double-blind experiments with, and the atmosphere is too big to experimentally manipulate in any case.

Nobody can do experiments to "prove" what causes a Type 1a supernova, because we can't manipulate stars. Instead, astrophysicists make predictions about what should happen. They wait and observe. They see it does happen. The theory is proven.

It's exactly the same with climate science.

If someone says astrophysics is real science, then by the same standards, climate science is real science.

If someone holds climate science to a different standard, or if they say astrophysics isn't science, then they're a cult imbecile, and no one cares what they say.

It takes a special breed of stupid to still believe what they say.

We're still waiting for you to list what hard data could disprove your religious beliefs. If you're not a pseudoscience fanatic, that shouldn't be a problem. Yet is always is a problem for you. Imagine that.

And do note that, no, "It's all natural!" is _not_ the null theory. It's an unsupported assumption that has to be proven with data. You don't get to define yourself as correct.

 

[EMH]

In opposition

No breakout in hurricane activity - 1940s strongest decade on record

U.S. Hurricane Strikes by Decade

How Do Hurricanes Form? | NASA Space Place – NASA Science for Kids

How do these monster storms happen?

spaceplace.nasa.gov

"That is why they form only over warm ocean waters near the equator."


And hence your side wants us to believe oceans are warming.... but there is no breakout in cane activity = laughable


We are still waiting for one single photo of a landmark "sinking" because your side has none. This is because NASA and the British Court in 2007 conclude THE DATA shows Antarctic ice increasing, which explains why the IPCC's "ocean rise" claim is completely wrong and fudge. AA is 90% of Earth ice.


Highly correlated satellite and balloon data showed NO WARMING in the atmosphere despite rising Co2, causing the most conflicted fudge job ever to cover for it...

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

In short your side, other than urban heat sink effect, has NO WARMING and NO EVIDENCE OF WARMING, meaning ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your side has no real warming outside of Urban Heat Sink Effect

Heat Island fucktard.

 

[westwall]

The price of ideologically-driven willful ignorance is exorbitant.

Damaging severe storms are on the rise, with every year since 2011 experiencing at least six “billion-dollar” storms in the US. From 2001-2022, the US saw six times more billion-dollar storms than in the previous two decades, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA defines a billion-dollar extreme weather or climate event as one that is so destructive it results in at least $1 billion worth of damages. The storms are typically characterized by high winds, hailstorms, derechos, and tornados. The storms since 1980 account for 48% of all billion-dollar weather disasters in the US.​

​

Prior to 2011, the US saw an average of about two billion-dollar storms per year. That number was almost 10 per year from 2011 through 2022.​

​

The average annual cost of billon-dollar severe storms rose from $2.5 billion between 1980 and 2000, to $15.4 billion between 2001 and 2022. Since 2001, billion-dollar severe storms have caused an estimated $339 billion in damages and 1,358 fatalities in the U.S. (All data is adjusted for inflation.)​

[The number of billion-dollar disasters from severe US storms is on the rise]​

Thanks to inflation, dumbass. That and more people living on the coasts.

The storms of today pale in comparison to those from the past.

 

[OKTexas]

If you labor under the delusion that your ideologically-driven claptrap is original thinking, you'd be very wrong.

What other scientific disciplines upset you? Herpetology? Crystallography? Proctology?

Some locales will be impacted more than others.

What will climate change cost you?

Florida, Texas, Central US could see biggest increase in hot days, new modeling shows​

View attachment 789922

View attachment 789926
​

What is First Street's report and where can you find it? ​

A peer-reviewed assessment and extreme heat model, it’s the latest in a series by First Street and its partners looking at warming-related risks in communities across the contiguous United States, including flooding, sea level rise and wildfire. The foundation and its partners put together federal weather records, property records, satellite information and other data for their model, using intermediate global climate projections. It also considered tree cover, paved surfaces and proximity to water. ​

​

The public can find the tool, Heat Factor, at RiskFactor.com and look at future property projections and trends over the past 30 years.​

​

Showing past trends should help build trust in the projections, Porter said, because people will see there are more hot days today and a higher probability of heat waves and dangerously hot days.​

Yet we've been running below normal temps, go figure. Still laughing my ass off at the parrot from the church of AGW.

.

 

[dudmuck]

Yet we've been running below normal temps, go figure. Still laughing my ass off at the parrot from the church of AWG.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Oh right, you freaks have abandon "AGW" in favor of "climate change" when warming took a hiatus. Too freaking funny.

.

 

[dudmuck]

Oh right, you freaks have abandon "AGW" in favor of "climate change" when warming took a hiatus. Too freaking funny.

.

the name change was to have it encompass the other effects its having on the planet..
Rising sea levels; shrinking mountain glaciers; accelerating ice melt in Greenland, Antarctica and the Arctic; and shifts in flower/plant blooming times.

 

[OKTexas]

the name change was to have it encompass the other effects its having on the planet..
Rising sea levels; shrinking mountain glaciers; accelerating ice melt in Greenland, Antarctica and the Arctic; and shifts in flower/plant blooming times.

Bullshit, it's so you can blame everything that happens, or not, on climate change. It nothing but a globalist wealth redistribution scheme. And you dumb asses are buying into it.

.

 

[EMH]

Rising sea levels

You cannot produce one single photo of a landmark sinking. The last attempt to do that was a photo of a storm surge in Norfolk in 2017. Norfolk Naval Base photos today show no ocean rise

accelerating ice melt in Greenland, Antarctica

This is where the SCIENCE INVALID gets outed. Both Greenland and Antarctica grow a new layer of ice every year. The warmers define that as "melting." Antarctica is devoid of liquid water, and Antarctic ice breaks off as icebergs, STILL FROZEN, yet they use the term "melting."

Every check the temperature readings from AA? Of course not. AA is growing, and Greenland's "melt" is an annual summer activity south of the Arctic Circle. There is no evidence Greenland's ice is retreating, and it continues to thicken.

shifts in flower/plant blooming times

MORON



Will parrot everything the Co2 fraud puts out, no matter how laughable.

 

[EMH]

Oh right, you freaks have abandon "AGW" in favor of "climate change" when warming took a hiatus. Too freaking funny.

.

They do that because Climate Change is a science and Global Warming is a theory completely disproven.

So "Climate Change is real" is like saying "Biology is real."

It is a wordsmith from charlatan liars...

 

[schmidlap]

Thanks to inflation, dumbass. That and more people living on the coasts.

The storms of today pale in comparison to those from the past.

Irrational, ideologically-driven denial of the overwhelming empirical evidence of the climatological reality and the consensus of every nation on earth is a silly sideshow.