Sunsettommy
Diamond Member
- Mar 19, 2018
- 14,972
- 12,596
- 2,400
LOL
97% believe humans impact the global temperature to varying degrees. If you actually knew what you were talking about you'd know that disputes to that claim involve how severe those impacts are. Some government officials mistakenly said 97% of them see man made climate change as an imminent threat. That part isn't true, but most of them still do believe it is an imminent threat, and 97% believe there is some impact by humans.
Very few Atmospheric Physicists believe there is "any threat" let alone an imminent one.. I am in the majority with my colleagues.
Tell me what the core premise is.... I am waiting...
Like I said before, if you know something the vast majority of qualified scientists don't know then you should go get rich and famous. I look forward to reading about you.
You have been asked twice what the AGW is,
Can increasing carbon dioxide cause climate change? (PDF)
(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 94, Number 16, pp. 8335-8342, August 1997)
- Richard S. Lindzen
The M&M Critique of the MBH98 Northern Hemisphere Climate Index: Update and Implications (PDF)
(Energy & Environment, Volume 16, Number 1, pp. 69-100, January 2005)
- Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick
The Climatological Significance of a Doubling of Earth's Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration
(Science, Volume 207, Issue 4438, pp. 1462-1463, March 1980)
- Sherwood B. Idso
Oh, by the way, all three studies you linked are kind of old. The last one is actually from almost 40 fucking years ago. Are you serious right now? Do you have any idea how much more we understand now? Anyway, even if you include your studies from 40 years ago the fact remains that there is a large consensus among scientists. If you dispute that you are disputing reality. There are 100 papers that back AGW claims for every one your conspiracy blog website points at.
You are too stupid to realize that I just destroyed your claim that they are from conspiracy websites,
quoting YOU
"Do you have any links that aren't from known conspiracy websites? Again, the consensus in undeniable if you live in reality. Most skeptics aren't stupid enough to argue that point. For every skeptic paper out there there's 100 others that support AGW claims."
I proved with the main links and posted examples of published science papers that they are NOT coming from "conspiracy websites", they are coming from science journals. In several postings, I have proved that there are many published science papers that disputed the idea that CO2 is the dominant driver of climate, your replies are all wind and piss, you can't disappear the reality that THOUSANDS of skeptical published science papers exist.
You should stop right here since you are being utterly DESTROYED in this thread.