Physicist Offers $10,000 To Anyone Who Can Disprove Climate Change

[elektra]

CO2 is dry ice.

 

[IanC]

CO2 is dry ice.

dry ice is cool, but dont pick it up with wet fingers or try to eat it

 

[Crick]

Where is that link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate?

Ever going to post it?

or are you finally going to admit that you can not?

You are the lyingest piece of shit I have ever met.

I would like to call out others on this board to correct this poster's lies. FlaCalTen, SSDD, Westwall, IanC - which of you believe Kosh speaks truth when he claims I have never presented him data and source code? And, of course, we have the record.

 

[flacaltenn]

There is no hysteria though I dare say I wouldn't mind a move by the common opinion in that direction. And the theory is not a prediction of future events. It says that AGW has been taking place since 1750 when we started increasing atmospheric CO2 levels and began seriously deforesting the planet.

I've twice now listed multiple ways in which you could falsify AGW. Let's try again and get down to the basics:

1) Prove that CO2 does not trap infrared OR that it does not trap any of the infrared that the Earth radiates OR that it is not trapping the infrared already being scooped up by water vapor
2) Prove that humans are not responsible for the 120 ppm of CO2 added to the atmosphere since 1750 - that it has some other source
3) Prove that the Earth has not warmed since 1750
4) Prove that some other cause for the observed warming has better evidence and better reasoning than AGW

Don't have to. Atmos physics says the warming that we've seen is concommitant with 1degC per doubling of CO2.. It's the EXTRAORDINARY FANTASIES of your CATASTROPHIC global warming AMPLIFICATIONS that are driving the debate. All PROJECTIONS of anything SERIOUS from GWarming "science" are highly fictional and exaggerated.. Therein lies your problem Bullwinkle. No matter how many times you regurgitate basic GHouse theory from the Wiki --- you are NOT EVEN CLOSE to describing the scientific debate over the MAGNITUDE of expected climate changes..

Get that difference -- or be ignored...

 

[Crick]

They are an order of magnitude less than the amplifications you would have required for TSI. Yet you claimed TSI was responsible.

 

[jc456]

Where is that link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate?

Ever going to post it?

or are you finally going to admit that you can not?

You are the lyingest piece of shit I have ever met.

I would like to call out others on this board to correct this poster's lies. FlaCalTen, SSDD, Westwall, IanC - which of you believe Kosh speaks truth when he claims I have never presented him data and source code? And, of course, we have the record.

Well you didn't ask me, but you presented data, but it isn't what was asked for. So technically he's correct and you are lying.

Also, everyone of those you listed including me have been asking you for the same proof. Yet still haven't presented it. So, either after the umpteenth hundredth time, you can't provide it I will assume you have no evidence. So further data without evidence is mute.

 

[Crick]

Another liar.

 

[jc456]

Another liar.

did you want something?

 

[Kosh]

Another liar.

Are you finally admitting it?

Are you coming out of the liars closet?

 

[elektra]

CO2 is carbonization in Cold Beer, how can that be?

 

[Crick]

Another liar.

did you want something?

Glad to see you know when you're called.

Some honesty would be a welcome change.

 

[Kosh]

Another liar.

did you want something?

Glad to see you know when you're called.

Some honesty would be a welcome change.

Yes it would, when are you going to post some?

 

[Crick]

CO2 is carbonization in Cold Beer, how can that be?

Take the most basic general science class you can find, and find out.

 

[Kosh]

CO2 is carbonization in Cold Beer, how can that be?

Take the most basic general science class you can find, and find out.

How would you know, since you do not believe in science?

 

[jc456]

Another liar.

did you want something?

Glad to see you know when you're called.

Some honesty would be a welcome change.

Yes it would, so why not provide the experiment we asked you for.

 

[flacaltenn]

They are an order of magnitude less than the amplifications you would have required for TSI. Yet you claimed TSI was responsible.

You don't even know what your religion states do you? There are no amplifications involved in the recent past temp record. No empirical evidence for it.. The temp rise is EASILY explained by a combination of natural factors and CO2.. And the observed evidence points to CO2 being responsible for less than 1/2 of the warming. Which is what PHYSICS says about the BASIC warming power of CO2.

Your bible states that CO2 is merely the "TRIGGER" that will cause the amplifications. That a 1 or 2 degC rise in surface temp. is enough to trigger CASTASTROPHIC (ie run-away) warming. That is what the MODELS predicted and that is what is NOT HAPPENING right now. But the whole CIRCUS TENT REVIVAL that you support is predicting 4 or even 8degC before this current CO2 doubling is over.. That's not likely to ever happen. Because the Magic Multipliers are gospel, not science..

So you are wasting everyone's time challenging skeptics on the basic physics of the GHouse. Mostly a shame for YOU -- because I can ignore you.. But until you address the apocalyptic projections your elders are PREDICTING and what science supports THOSE CLAIMS -- You and Nancy Pelosi don't have a case against skeptics..

Explain to me how a doubling of CO2 from 280ppm will raise temperatures 5degC and cause killer storms, droughts, snow, no-snow, disease and METERS of ocean rise..
THAT is what I'm skeptical about. Because according to basic science -- CO2 doesn't have those superpowers..

 

[elektra]

CO2 is carbonization in Cold Beer, how can that be?

Take the most basic general science class you can find, and find out.

I know, it hurts, its also dry ice, CO2 is dry ice, pure C02, sucks, huh.

We could use CO2 as insulation in homes right? Maybe they should use CO2 in Triple Pane windows instead of Argon. At least where its cold, right?

 

[Crick]

Maybe you could make a comment with some significance. If you want to babble, speak to your children.

 

[Crick]

They are an order of magnitude less than the amplifications you would have required for TSI. Yet you claimed TSI was responsible.

You don't even know what your religion states do you? There are no amplifications involved in the recent past temp record. No empirical evidence for it.. The temp rise is EASILY explained by a combination of natural factors and CO2.. And the observed evidence points to CO2 being responsible for less than 1/2 of the warming. Which is what PHYSICS says about the BASIC warming power of CO2.

Your bible states that CO2 is merely the "TRIGGER" that will cause the amplifications. That a 1 or 2 degC rise in surface temp. is enough to trigger CASTASTROPHIC (ie run-away) warming. That is what the MODELS predicted and that is what is NOT HAPPENING right now. But the whole CIRCUS TENT REVIVAL that you support is predicting 4 or even 8degC before this current CO2 doubling is over.. That's not likely to ever happen. Because the Magic Multipliers are gospel, not science..

So you are wasting everyone's time challenging skeptics on the basic physics of the GHouse. Mostly a shame for YOU -- because I can ignore you.. But until you address the apocalyptic projections your elders are PREDICTING and what science supports THOSE CLAIMS -- You and Nancy Pelosi don't have a case against skeptics..

Explain to me how a doubling of CO2 from 280ppm will raise temperatures 5degC and cause killer storms, droughts, snow, no-snow, disease and METERS of ocean rise..
THAT is what I'm skeptical about. Because according to basic science -- CO2 doesn't have those superpowers..

I don't need a case against deniers. Deniers need a case against mainstream science. And so far, that's been something completely lacking.

It's simple enough. When the vast majority of climate scientists reject AGW, I will too.

 

[Crick]

CO2 is carbonization in Cold Beer, how can that be?

Take the most basic general science class you can find, and find out.

How would you know, since you do not believe in science?

Probably 90% of my college education was science. I've spent the last 30 years working in naval research & development.

How about you Koos? How much science education have you had? How much science do you use in your typical day?

ps: have you figured out what to do with that source code and those data files yet? I'm on the edge of my seat in anticipation.