Global Warming is political "science" and politicians need a question put to them

[Crick]

You don't know the meaning of the word "falsifiable," moron.

I'm quite certain that I do. But please explain why you think so.

 

[Crick]

I'm quite certain that I do. But please explain why you think so.

Keep in mind that AGW includes both the theory that the planet is growing warmer and that human GHG emissions are the primary cause. I have addressed both.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Falsify the absorption spectra of CO2 and methane.
Falsify the anthropogenic source of CO2 above 280 ppm
Falsify the Greenhouse Effect
Falsify the temperature record
Falsify the loss of snow and ice worldwide
Falsify rising sea levels
Falsify changes to the AMOC from meltwater
Falsify mass loss in Greenland and Antarctica
Falsify that warm ocean water is causing the destabilization of the WAIS
Falsify measurements of downwelling infrared
Falsify satellite records of LWIR escaping to space

Falsify the absorption spectra of CO2 and methane.

That's not AGW.

Falsify the anthropogenic source of CO2 above 280 ppm

That's not AGW.

Falsify the Greenhouse Effect

That's not AGW.

Falsify the temperature record

That's not AGW.

Falsify the loss of snow and ice worldwide

That's not AGW.

Falsify rising sea levels

That's not AGW.

Falsify changes to the AMOC from meltwater

That's not AGW.

Falsify mass loss in Greenland and Antarctica

That's not AGW.

Falsify that warm ocean water is causing the destabilization of the WAIS

That's not AGW.

Falsify measurements of downwelling infrared

That's not AGW.

Falsify satellite records of LWIR escaping to space

That's not AGW.

Are you feeling ok? You seem more confused than usual.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm quite certain that I do. But please explain why you think so.

You believe that "falsifiable" means that if no one proves it wrong, then it's true.

You just demonstrated that in your post to Toddsterpatriot where you demanded that he falsify this or that theory.

​

 

[Crick]

Falsify the absorption spectra of CO2 and methane.

That's not AGW.

But if they didn't absorb the IR their spectra says they do, AGW would be falsified.

Falsify the anthropogenic source of CO2 above 280 ppm

That's not AGW.

If humans were not responsible for the increased GHGs, then AGW would be falsified.

Falsify the Greenhouse Effect

That's not AGW.

If there was no Greenhouse effect then AGW would be falsified.

Falsify the temperature record

That's not AGW.

If the world was not getting hotter then AGW would be falsified.

Falsify the loss of snow and ice worldwide

That's not AGW.

If the world were not losing ice from increasing temperatures and therefore losing albedo providing positive feedback to the warming, then AGW would be falsified.

Falsify rising sea levels

That's not AGW.

If sea levels were not rising from increasing ocean temperatures and increasing icemelt then AGW would be falsified.

Falsify changes to the AMOC from meltwater

That's not AGW.

If the AMOC were not being weakened by large amounts of fresh meltwater then AGW would be falsified.

Falsify mass loss in Greenland and Antarctica

That's not AGW.

If Greenland and Antarctica were not suffering increased melting from increased temperatures, AGW would be falsified.

Falsify that warm ocean water is causing the destabilization of the WAIS

That's not AGW.

If the WAIS were not being destabilized by warm ocean water, AGW would be falsified.

Falsify measurements of downwelling infrared

That's not AGW.

If downwelling IR were not observed verifying the Greenhouse effect, AGW would be falsified

Falsify satellite records of LWIR escaping to space

That's not AGW.

If satellite records did not show LWIR trends supporting the Greenhouse effect, AGW would be falsified.

Are you feeling ok? You seem more confused than usual.

Why don't you explain to us what you believe the theory of anthropogenic global warming to say since you seem to think that none of these various observations and processes have anything to do with it. And if you cannot, then you cannot make a judgement as to what will or will not falsify it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why don't you explain to us what you believe the theory of anthropogenic global warming to say

You first.

 

[Crick]

You first.

From the Executive Summary of WG-1, AR4 of the IPCC

Anthropogenic warming of the climate system can be detected in temperature observations taken at the surface, in the troposphere and in the oceans. Multi-signal detection and attribution analyses, which quantify the contributions of different natural and anthropogenic forcings to observed changes, show that greenhouse gas forcing alone during the past half century would likely have resulted in greater than the observed warming if there had not been an offsetting cooling effect from aerosol and other forcings. It is extremely unlikely (<5%) that the global pattern of warming during the past half century can be explained without external forcing, and very unlikely that it is due to known natural external causes alone. The warming occurred in both the ocean and the atmosphere and took place at a time when natural external forcing factors would likely have produced cooling. Greenhouse gas forcing has very likely caused most of the observed global warming over the last 50 years. This conclusion takes into account observational and forcing uncertainty, and the possibility that the response to solar forcing could be underestimated by climate models. It is also robust to the use of different climate models, different methods for estimating the responses to external forcing and variations in the analysis technique. Further evidence has accumulated of an anthropogenic infl uence on the temperature of the free atmosphere as measured by radiosondes and satellite-based instruments. The observed pattern of tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling is very likely due to the infl uence of anthropogenic forcing, particularly greenhouse gases and stratospheric ozone depletion. The combination of a warming troposphere and a cooling stratosphere has likely led to an increase in the height of the tropopause. It is likely that anthropogenic forcing has contributed to the general warming observed in the upper several hundred meters of the ocean during the latter half of the 20th century. Anthropogenic forcing, resulting in thermal expansion from ocean warming and glacier mass loss, has very likely contributed to sea level rise during the latter half of the 20th century. It is diffi cult to quantify the contribution of anthropogenic forcing to ocean heat content increase and glacier melting with presently available detection and attribution studies.

In my words: Global warming detectable at the surface, the troposphere and the oceans is taking place primarily as a result of greenhouse warming acting on human emissions of CO2 and methane.

We're having dinner out with a friend and I have to go. I can add more later if needed.

 

[Dagosa]

This is just pathetic.

Science went out with journalism here in America, it was "canceled." Global Warming is 100% politics and 0% science. That is why this topic is here.

There is a question the warmers cannot answer, the media will not ask, and the politicians pushing algore's fraud want censored. Fox will not ask it. Ted Cruz will not ask it. Why, because it flat out destroys the argument that Co2 causes climate change... and hence the credibility of the entire "news" media and the liars behind the fraud.

The warmers want you to believe Co2 is the driving variable behind Earth climate change. IT is not. The data never supported that conclusion. What causes Earth climate change is precisely what the past million years of Northern Hemisphere history tells us....


What did North America (NA) look like 1 million years ago?

All of Canada down through Indiana was covered in mile plus think ice 1 million years ago, the "North American Ice Age" (notice it is continent specific).

Now, in the first image, Greenland is frozen a million years ago ..... but was it?????????





"Ancient Greenland Was Actually Green

The oldest ever recovered DNA samples have been collected from under more than a mile of Greenland ice, and their analysis suggests the island was much warmer during the last Ice Age than previously thought.


The DNA is proof that sometime between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago, much of Greenland was especially green and covered in a boreal forest that was home to alder, spruce and pine trees, as well as insects such as butterflies and beetles.


IN PLAIN ENGLISH


During the Past 1 million years, Greenland FROZE while North America thawed, all at the same time on the same planet with the same atmosphere with the same amount of Co2 in the atmosphere


WHY?

WHAT CAUSED THAT?


Not one of the people here or in DC pushing algore's fraud can answer that. Clearly, the atmosphere did not cause it. Hence, Co2 had nothing to do with it....


So I ask, everyone here, before we bilk the taxpayer out of trillions more for algore's fraud, why do not we insist these thieving fudge baking liars answer that question before one more dime is spent on their phony theory and their anti-american fascist agenda....

Copy paste bull shit.