Marco Rubio Can't Name One Source for Idiotic GOP Climate Claim

[CrusaderFrank]

1930? Where did you even get that from? The plot I show indicates the peak in ~1944 wasn't reached again until ~1972.


It stopped "working" as you call it because of atmospheric sulphates that block out the sun.

Injecting particulates into the air as actually been proposed has a last resort "solution" - decades from now after you morons have allowed to fuck everything up but finally you're all dead, we'll have to do SOMETHING to fix the issue - so the upside of doing this might be worth more than the downside. The obvious downside of injecting particulates into the air to stop warming is the reduction in light hitting the Earth's surface will mean lower crop yields.

So you can demonstrate this in a lab setting, correct?

You're not just making shit up with every post, right?

You can show a 120PPM increase in CO2 (or whatever it was up to 1972) would cause x degrees of warming and how aerosols and/or sulfates (are they the same thing? I didn't think so, but you'll probably just make up something in your next post Aerosol sulfates) stifles the "Warming"

Eagerly awaiting your next post.

The concept of radiative forcing is one of the most fundamental concepts of climate science. The fact you have demonstrated complete lack of knowledge of this very basic concept is evidence that causes me to believe you are a complete hack, totally uninterested in the truth.

The radiative forcing of CO2 can be directly computed from its absorption cross section. Its no more deceitful that using the laws of gravity to calculate how long it will take a rock to fall.

The Vostock Ice Cores called, they said you got it wrong over a 600,000 year period. You've been played

 

[Freewill]

Answered in post 80.
1930 to 1970 should have been a cooling cycle like the period from 1880 to 1910, but CO2 flattened that cycle out. We are in another flat cycle now that should also have been a cooling cycle, but this cycle is even flatter than 1930 to 1970. Probably the next cooling cycle will not even be flat, just a slowdown in warming.

Why should it have been a "Cooling cycle" When did you guys make that up?

Because if there never were cooling cycles we would be much warmer, as future generations will find out!

According to the graph from NOAA there hasn't been a cooling cycle. Maybe a few dips but certainly you can't say there is a real cooling cycle since 1920, at least according to NOAA, not me.

 

[Zander]

It takes a willful suspension of disbelief to continue to buy into the CAGW fairytale.. The mouthpieces for the movement are all liar, frauds, and hypocrites. Every model and every prognostication has been wrong.

Fools love to be fooled......

 

[Rambunctious]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vnp4kj5lLOU]Walt Disney - Chicken Little - 1943 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank just flat out lies...you cant debate people like him

Want to shut Frank up?

No, I'll give you enough rope to keep hanging yourself

Post the experiment

You know the AGWCult is lying to you, right? Most of them get paid a lot, so if you're not getting paid, you're being played

AGWCult has 2 types of members: Those who get paid and those who get played. Which are you?

 

[Rambunctious]

I can name a source it's called common sense!

It turns out much of what common sense tells us is just plain wrong.
The purpose of science is to get us past common sense.

I refuse to believe that the compound that I exhale and plants feed on is harmful to the earth and nothing else in nature rivals that dangerous compound.

It doesn't really matter what you believe.

Not even the sun or volcano's or oceans and wind currents.

You should speak in complete sentences if you want others to understand the thoughts you are trying to convey.

I'm sorry you either have to be profiting from this hoax in some way or you're just a gullible fool to believe this is 1. even happening 2. is a crises 3. can be fixed by government dictate.

I can tell you've done absolutely no research at all on the subject, and instead are relying what you just feel must be right.

Conducting scientific research on flawed science is an exercise in futility.

 

[Stephanie]

oh darn, this looks a little more than A half a dozen...you people so dishonest...if Obama is for it you all are for it..admit it... and you will lie lie lie...just like there this 97% of scientist they spew...it's all a lie

SNIP:
Poll: Nearly half of meteorologists don’t believe in man-made global warming

5:11 PM 11/26/2013

Not all scientists agree that global warming is man-made. Nearly half of meteorologists and atmospheric science experts don’t believe that human activities are the driving force behind global warming, according to a survey by the American Meteorological Society.

The survey of AMS members found that while 52 percent of American Meteorological Society members believe climate change is occurring and mostly human-induced, 48 percent of members do not believe in man-made global warming.

all of it here with links
Read more: Nearly half of meteorologists reject man-made global warming | The Daily Caller

 

[Sarah G]

oh darn, this looks a little more than A half a dozen...you people so dishonest...if Obama is for it you all are for it..admit it... and you will lie lie lie...just like there this 97% of scientist they spew...it's all a lie

SNIP:
Poll: Nearly half of meteorologists don’t believe in man-made global warming

5:11 PM 11/26/2013

Not all scientists agree that global warming is man-made. Nearly half of meteorologists and atmospheric science experts don’t believe that human activities are the driving force behind global warming, according to a survey by the American Meteorological Society.

The survey of AMS members found that while 52 percent of American Meteorological Society members believe climate change is occurring and mostly human-induced, 48 percent of members do not believe in man-made global warming.

all of it here with links
Read more: Nearly half of meteorologists reject man-made global warming | The Daily Caller

Nearly half in that poll you mean?

 

[Stephanie]

and poll after poll show's more than HALF of the American people don't believe it's MAN MADE, not that there isn't global warming...the damn earth cools and warms all the damn time....and they don't find it's something that is high on their list of their priorities when voting
but you people will just go on calling them all stupid and try and SHOVE it down their throats...like everything else because by golly you libs just CAN'T BE WRONG

 

[Iceweasel]

Sorry, Ernie, he isn't brilliant, far from it. It isn't one isolated case, he's spoonfed just about everything he has to say. He's a panderer too.

Sounds like you are confusing Obama with Rubio. When has Obama ever been asked to cite a specific source for anything anyway? Funny how that works. Bush was asked what he thought his worst failure was, no bias there. The bottom line is that the left defines intelligence as agreement with them.

Nobody gets as detailed as Obama especially in an impromptu meeting of any kind. He takes questions, he researchs the material and can discuss on any given day. He's smart.

You're just not listening to anyone but Rush, Palin, Rubio, etc..

LOL. That was funny. You should do standup.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

There's a radio talk show host named Todd Schnitt that has a list of links to 6 or 700 articles about shoddy science, fabricated data and massaged computer models. I used to refer to it often, but it appears that those pages are restricted to "premium members" these days.

k

That may be true, but almost all of these articles are not subject to peer review, and most of them are written by the same half a dozen or so people.

Then there's the question of just what is the ideal temperature of the planet.
Who the hell are we to pick an arbitrary date and say global temperature has risen 0.6 degrees C from this point. Why not pick another point and claim global temperature has gone down 1.3 degrees?

I agree! Why not? Go ahead an tell us the last time global temperatures were 1.3 degrees Centigrade higher than they are now. I'd love to know!

Un true. But relax. I'm not going to pay for access to Schnitt's archives

Why would you have to? Are you telling me a guy names Schnitt owns the copyrights to every single anti-AGW paper in existence?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

And as to the last question: I have no idea. Reliable temperature records that could give us a clear and reliable average global temperature only go back at best 100 years. We do know that temperatures have varied a lot in the last, say 1,000 years, but we can't reliably tell by how much.

Best guess with computer models and analysis of ice cores, etc. is that average global temperature rose about .09 degrees from 0 AD through 1,000 AD and about 0.5 degrees since.

When was the last time it was 1.3 C warmer than now?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

So you can demonstrate this in a lab setting, correct?

You're not just making shit up with every post, right?

You can show a 120PPM increase in CO2 (or whatever it was up to 1972) would cause x degrees of warming and how aerosols and/or sulfates (are they the same thing? I didn't think so, but you'll probably just make up something in your next post Aerosol sulfates) stifles the "Warming"

Eagerly awaiting your next post.

The concept of radiative forcing is one of the most fundamental concepts of climate science. The fact you have demonstrated complete lack of knowledge of this very basic concept is evidence that causes me to believe you are a complete hack, totally uninterested in the truth.

The radiative forcing of CO2 can be directly computed from its absorption cross section. Its no more deceitful that using the laws of gravity to calculate how long it will take a rock to fall.

The Vostock Ice Cores called, they said you got it wrong over a 600,000 year period. You've been played

You don't measure the absorption cross section of CO2 for infrared radiation by taking an ice core!

You are seriously the most mentally deficient person I have ever met. Is someone typing for you? Its amazing to me you can even breathe on your own.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

It takes a willful suspension of disbelief to continue to buy into the CAGW fairytale..

All you really have to do is look at the evidence.

The mouthpieces for the movement are all liar, frauds, and hypocrites. Every model and every prognostication has been wrong.

That's not even true.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I can name a source it's called common sense!

It turns out much of what common sense tells us is just plain wrong.
The purpose of science is to get us past common sense.


It doesn't really matter what you believe.

You should speak in complete sentences if you want others to understand the thoughts you are trying to convey.

I'm sorry you either have to be profiting from this hoax in some way or you're just a gullible fool to believe this is 1. even happening 2. is a crises 3. can be fixed by government dictate.

I can tell you've done absolutely no research at all on the subject, and instead are relying what you just feel must be right.

Conducting scientific research on flawed science is an exercise in futility.

In other words - other people told you the research is flawed - so you can be a lazy moron, do absolutely no work of your own, and just believe whatever they tell you.

 

[TrainTime]

Why would Rubio be able to name some obscure climatologist off the cuff? ....There are hundreds of them that aren't living on grant money from the Regime. Until lately they haven't spoken up because of the ferocity of the attacks against them for telling the truth. Need some proof?

Global Warming: Ten Facts and Ten Myths on Climate Change | Global Research

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The concept of radiative forcing is one of the most fundamental concepts of climate science. The fact you have demonstrated complete lack of knowledge of this very basic concept is evidence that causes me to believe you are a complete hack, totally uninterested in the truth.

The radiative forcing of CO2 can be directly computed from its absorption cross section. Its no more deceitful that using the laws of gravity to calculate how long it will take a rock to fall.

The Vostock Ice Cores called, they said you got it wrong over a 600,000 year period. You've been played

You don't measure the absorption cross section of CO2 for infrared radiation by taking an ice core!

You are seriously the most mentally deficient person I have ever met. Is someone typing for you? Its amazing to me you can even breathe on your own.

The ice cores measured temperature AND CO2 across a 600,000 year period. If CO2 worked as your Cult alleged you'd see EVIDENCE of that in the chart.

The chart refutes your stupid theory. Now tell us about these aerosols and sulfates that conspired to keep CO2 lagging temperature for 600,000 years

I don't even mind the insults because it's clear you've been played

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

I don't get it.. Why are liberals in favor of huge electric bills? They claim to be for the poor man and yet a lot of idiotic policies they support, harm the poor more than anyone else.. It makes NO SENSE.

 

[Peach]

oh darn, this looks a little more than A half a dozen...you people so dishonest...if Obama is for it you all are for it..admit it... and you will lie lie lie...just like there this 97% of scientist they spew...it's all a lie

SNIP:
Poll: Nearly half of meteorologists don’t believe in man-made global warming

5:11 PM 11/26/2013

Not all scientists agree that global warming is man-made. Nearly half of meteorologists and atmospheric science experts don’t believe that human activities are the driving force behind global warming, according to a survey by the American Meteorological Society.

The survey of AMS members found that while 52 percent of American Meteorological Society members believe climate change is occurring and mostly human-induced, 48 percent of members do not believe in man-made global warming.

all of it here with links
Read more: Nearly half of meteorologists reject man-made global warming | The Daily Caller

Nearly half in that poll you mean?

The Daily Caller is 'fair & balanced" Here is the real science:

IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

And the term is 'climate change', not global warming; the changes bring extremes, hot/cold, wet/dry. If anyone doesn't believe the massive amount of chemicals spewed into the atmosphere since the beginning of the Industrial Age, hasn't had an effect on earth, they are dreaming. We do not know exactly what changes will occur in the long run, but pretending there have been no effects is............useless.

 

[Stephanie]

oh darn, this looks a little more than A half a dozen...you people so dishonest...if Obama is for it you all are for it..admit it... and you will lie lie lie...just like there this 97% of scientist they spew...it's all a lie

SNIP:
Poll: Nearly half of meteorologists don’t believe in man-made global warming

5:11 PM 11/26/2013

Not all scientists agree that global warming is man-made. Nearly half of meteorologists and atmospheric science experts don’t believe that human activities are the driving force behind global warming, according to a survey by the American Meteorological Society.

The survey of AMS members found that while 52 percent of American Meteorological Society members believe climate change is occurring and mostly human-induced, 48 percent of members do not believe in man-made global warming.

all of it here with links
Read more: Nearly half of meteorologists reject man-made global warming | The Daily Caller

Nearly half in that poll you mean?

The Daily Caller is 'fair & balanced" Here is the real science:

IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

And the term is 'climate change', not global warming; the changes bring extremes, hot/cold, wet/dry. If anyone doesn't believe the massive amount of chemicals spewed into the atmosphere since the beginning of the Industrial Age, hasn't had an effect on earth, they are dreaming. We do not know exactly what changes will occur in the long run, but pretending there have been no effects is............useless.

ipcc REALLY
who runs that?
and again, the majority of the people polled does not find gloBULL warming high on their list of thing's to worry about
so you all believe what you need...You will ignore the will of the people, call them stupid, flat Earthers DENIERS just like Obama does...