Some Daytime Temperatures In The Midwest

[Sunsettommy]

Heres my side.

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet


Disprove all that consensus.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three.

The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up?

Again, it must be so easy to provide your evidence which can convince anyone that AGW is just conjecture.


So where is it?

It is YOU who has to prove that the AGW conjecture claims are supportable, your link didn't do that at all.

 

[Moonglow]

Here in the Midwest state of Mizzouri we had a high of 24.

 

[Oddball]

Heres my side.

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet


Disprove all that consensus.

"Consensus" isn't science, Gomer.

 

[otto105]

Heres my side.

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet


Disprove all that consensus.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three.

The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up?

Again, it must be so easy to provide your evidence which can convince anyone that AGW is just conjecture.


So where is it?

It is YOU who has to prove that the AGW conjecture claims are supportable, your link didn't do that at all.

My link from NASA states this...

Temperature data showing rapid warming in the past few decades. According to NASA data, 2016 was the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. The 10 warmest years in the 138-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the four warmest years being the four most recent years. Credit: NASA/NOAA.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


You must have missed that

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I go where the evidence leads, I do not discount things because my party masters told me or because the savior in the White House said so.

Big fat lie. The evidence does not support the AGW con.

of course it does.

Wrong. You simply ignore all the evidence that proves AGW is wrong. like the fact that 98% of all the climate models failed to predict the current world ave temperature.

as was stated above, models are not evidence.

Then why do the AGW cultists keep claiming they are evidence?

Because they do not understand what evidence is. Not unlike you morons who think a cold day is evidence again AGW

 

[Harpy Eagle]

two. Nobody questions that.

Dead wrong. All the SJWs question it.

no, they question how many genders there are.

Gender and sex are not the same thing even though they are mistakenly used interchangeably

They're the same damn thing. There are two sexes and two genders, period.

they are not the same thing at all.,

Sex is biological term and gender is a literary term

It's a "literary" term? You mean it's fiction?

lit·er·ar·yDictionary result for literary
/ˈlidəˌrerē/Submit
adjective
1.
concerning the writing, study, or content of literature, especially of the kind valued for quality of form.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Heres my side.

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet


Disprove all that consensus.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three.

The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up?

Again, it must be so easy to provide your evidence which can convince anyone that AGW is just conjecture.


So where is it?

It is YOU who has to prove that the AGW conjecture claims are supportable, your link didn't do that at all.

My link from NASA states this...

Temperature data showing rapid warming in the past few decades. According to NASA data, 2016 was the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. The 10 warmest years in the 138-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the four warmest years being the four most recent years. Credit: NASA/NOAA.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


You must have missed that

You are so pathetic, since I have already stated this:

"Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three."

You must have missed that

Then stated this, in which you have not addressed:

"The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up? "

The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto?

 

[JGalt]

BTW bripat


The thermometer in your backyard only proves that its cold in your backyard.

Just stop already. Please feel free to show me on today's world temperature map, where they're experiencing this so-called "global warming"...

World Temperatures: Weather Map and Temperature Extremes

 

[bripat9643]

Big fat lie. The evidence does not support the AGW con.

of course it does.

Wrong. You simply ignore all the evidence that proves AGW is wrong. like the fact that 98% of all the climate models failed to predict the current world ave temperature.

as was stated above, models are not evidence.

Then why do the AGW cultists keep claiming they are evidence?

Because they do not understand what evidence is. Not unlike you morons who think a cold day is evidence again AGW

You don't understand what evidence is either.

 

[otto105]

Heres my side.

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet


Disprove all that consensus.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three.

The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up?

Again, it must be so easy to provide your evidence which can convince anyone that AGW is just conjecture.


So where is it?

It is YOU who has to prove that the AGW conjecture claims are supportable, your link didn't do that at all.

My link from NASA states this...

Temperature data showing rapid warming in the past few decades. According to NASA data, 2016 was the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. The 10 warmest years in the 138-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the four warmest years being the four most recent years. Credit: NASA/NOAA.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


You must have missed that

You are so pathetic, since I have already stated this:

"Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three."

You must have missed that

Then stated this, in which you have not addressed:

"The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up? "

The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto?

From my NASA link there are additional links to 18 scientific organizations and their peer reviewed studies stating that AGW is real and happening.

You apparently missed clicking on the evidence part... so here it is... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Can you point to natural occurance which is causing the CO2 spike..

 

[otto105]

BTW bripat


The thermometer in your backyard only proves that its cold in your backyard.

Just stop already. Please feel free to show me on today's world temperature map, where they're experiencing this so-called "global warming"...

World Temperatures: Weather Map and Temperature Extremes

Don't reduce yourself to being an aynrand boy.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three.

The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up?

Again, it must be so easy to provide your evidence which can convince anyone that AGW is just conjecture.


So where is it?

It is YOU who has to prove that the AGW conjecture claims are supportable, your link didn't do that at all.

My link from NASA states this...

Temperature data showing rapid warming in the past few decades. According to NASA data, 2016 was the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. The 10 warmest years in the 138-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the four warmest years being the four most recent years. Credit: NASA/NOAA.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


You must have missed that

You are so pathetic, since I have already stated this:

"Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three."

You must have missed that

Then stated this, in which you have not addressed:

"The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up? "

The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto?

From my NASA link there are additional links to 18 scientific organizations and their peer reviewed studies stating that AGW is real and happening.

You apparently missed clicking on the evidence part... so here it is... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Can you point to natural occurance which is causing the CO2 spike..

Ha ha ha...., why is so hard for ignorant warmists to answer a simple question?

I asked you to show the evidence that supports AGW conjecture using real data and gone through the SCIENTIFIC METHOD:

"The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto? "

No one is denying that CO2 has been going up, no one denies it has been warming for more than 100 years, no one is denying climate can change.

What YOU have yet to do is show me science research using the SCIENTIFIC METHOD using real data and making TESTABLE hypothesis.

You haven't once showed that the AGW conjecture is validated, it hasn't been, which is why you keep failing to answer the simple question, since falling back on the worn out and useless consensus and authority fallacies is all you can do since AGW conjecture has NEVER been validated.

This should be obvious by now, but you have no critical thinking skills to use to understand WHY you are failing to answer the simple question.

Your science ILLITERACY is easy to see here.

 

[JGalt]

BTW bripat


The thermometer in your backyard only proves that its cold in your backyard.

Just stop already. Please feel free to show me on today's world temperature map, where they're experiencing this so-called "global warming"...

World Temperatures: Weather Map and Temperature Extremes

Don't reduce yourself to being an aynrand boy.

So where's all this massive "climate change"?

I'm not seeing it.

 

[otto105]

Again, it must be so easy to provide your evidence which can convince anyone that AGW is just conjecture.


So where is it?

It is YOU who has to prove that the AGW conjecture claims are supportable, your link didn't do that at all.

My link from NASA states this...

Temperature data showing rapid warming in the past few decades. According to NASA data, 2016 was the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. The 10 warmest years in the 138-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the four warmest years being the four most recent years. Credit: NASA/NOAA.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


You must have missed that

You are so pathetic, since I have already stated this:

"Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three."

You must have missed that

Then stated this, in which you have not addressed:

"The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up? "

The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto?

From my NASA link there are additional links to 18 scientific organizations and their peer reviewed studies stating that AGW is real and happening.

You apparently missed clicking on the evidence part... so here it is... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Can you point to natural occurance which is causing the CO2 spike..

Ha ha ha...., why is so hard for ignorant warmists to answer a simple question?

I asked you to show the evidence that supports AGW conjecture using real data and gone through the SCIENTIFIC METHOD:

"The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto? "

No one is denying that CO2 has been going up, no one denies it has been warming for more than 100 years, no one is denying climate can change.

What YOU have yet to do is show me science research using the SCIENTIFIC METHOD using real data and making TESTABLE hypothesis.

You haven't once showed that the AGW conjecture is validated, it hasn't been, which is why you keep failing to answer the simple question, since falling back on the worn out and useless consensus and authority fallacies is all you can do since AGW conjecture has NEVER been validated.

This should be obvious by now, but you have no critical thinking skills to use to understand WHY you are failing to answer the simple question.

Your science ILLITERACY is easy to see here.

Try reading first, nutjob stufff after.

Its all right here... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Now show me some critical reading.

 

[Sunsettommy]

It is YOU who has to prove that the AGW conjecture claims are supportable, your link didn't do that at all.

My link from NASA states this...

Temperature data showing rapid warming in the past few decades. According to NASA data, 2016 was the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. The 10 warmest years in the 138-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the four warmest years being the four most recent years. Credit: NASA/NOAA.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


You must have missed that

You are so pathetic, since I have already stated this:

"Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three."

You must have missed that

Then stated this, in which you have not addressed:

"The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up? "

The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto?

From my NASA link there are additional links to 18 scientific organizations and their peer reviewed studies stating that AGW is real and happening.

You apparently missed clicking on the evidence part... so here it is... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Can you point to natural occurance which is causing the CO2 spike..

Ha ha ha...., why is so hard for ignorant warmists to answer a simple question?

I asked you to show the evidence that supports AGW conjecture using real data and gone through the SCIENTIFIC METHOD:

"The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto? "

No one is denying that CO2 has been going up, no one denies it has been warming for more than 100 years, no one is denying climate can change.

What YOU have yet to do is show me science research using the SCIENTIFIC METHOD using real data and making TESTABLE hypothesis.

You haven't once showed that the AGW conjecture is validated, it hasn't been, which is why you keep failing to answer the simple question, since falling back on the worn out and useless consensus and authority fallacies is all you can do since AGW conjecture has NEVER been validated.

This should be obvious by now, but you have no critical thinking skills to use to understand WHY you are failing to answer the simple question.

Your science ILLITERACY is easy to see here.

Try reading first, nutjob stufff after.

Its all right here... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Now show me some critical reading.

It is clear you can't answer the simple question.

Your links NEVER showed validation of the AGW conjecture using real data, making TESTABLE Hypothesis using the Scientific Method way of research. All you do is google and paste stuff, you can't make a coherent reply on your own.

You are a typical warmist dupe.

 

[otto105]

My link from NASA states this...

Temperature data showing rapid warming in the past few decades. According to NASA data, 2016 was the warmest year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. The 10 warmest years in the 138-year record all have occurred since 2000, with the four warmest years being the four most recent years. Credit: NASA/NOAA.

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


You must have missed that

You are so pathetic, since I have already stated this:

"Nobody denies that climate changes over time, nobody. Strike One.

Nobody denies that it has been warming for over 100 years, Strike Two.

Nobody denies that some people wet their pants over climate modeling junk science, while pushing the meaningless consensus crap. Strike Three."

You must have missed that

Then stated this, in which you have not addressed:

"The only thing that gets disproved is the AGW conjecture, which was refuted years ago, when will you catch up? "

The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto?

From my NASA link there are additional links to 18 scientific organizations and their peer reviewed studies stating that AGW is real and happening.

You apparently missed clicking on the evidence part... so here it is... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Can you point to natural occurance which is causing the CO2 spike..

Ha ha ha...., why is so hard for ignorant warmists to answer a simple question?

I asked you to show the evidence that supports AGW conjecture using real data and gone through the SCIENTIFIC METHOD:

"The NASA chart and Consensus doesn't work here, I expected science based research, using empirical data and wrung through the Scientific Method to make your case.

You have anything at all, Otto? "

No one is denying that CO2 has been going up, no one denies it has been warming for more than 100 years, no one is denying climate can change.

What YOU have yet to do is show me science research using the SCIENTIFIC METHOD using real data and making TESTABLE hypothesis.

You haven't once showed that the AGW conjecture is validated, it hasn't been, which is why you keep failing to answer the simple question, since falling back on the worn out and useless consensus and authority fallacies is all you can do since AGW conjecture has NEVER been validated.

This should be obvious by now, but you have no critical thinking skills to use to understand WHY you are failing to answer the simple question.

Your science ILLITERACY is easy to see here.

Try reading first, nutjob stufff after.

Its all right here... Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Now show me some critical reading.

It is clear you can't answer the simple question.

Your links NEVER showed validation of the AGW conjecture using real data, making TESTABLE Hypothesis using the Scientific Method way of research. All you do is google and paste stuff, you can't make a coherent reply on your own.

You are a typical warmist dupe.

Okay heres NASA

Global Temperature | Vital Signs – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet


This graph illustrates the change in global surface temperature relative to 1951-1980 average temperatures. Seventeen of the 18 warmest years in the 136-year record all have occurred since 2001, with the exception of 1998. The year 2016 ranks as the warmest on record. (Source: NASA/GISS). This research is broadly consistent with similar constructions prepared by the Climatic Research Unit and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.



Refute that.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

of course it does.

Wrong. You simply ignore all the evidence that proves AGW is wrong. like the fact that 98% of all the climate models failed to predict the current world ave temperature.

as was stated above, models are not evidence.

Then why do the AGW cultists keep claiming they are evidence?

Because they do not understand what evidence is. Not unlike you morons who think a cold day is evidence again AGW

You don't understand what evidence is either.

Data are evidence...it is that simple.

 

[Crepitus]

I've explained that to these deniers in something like 12 different threads since this cold snap started.

 

[Crepitus]

Heres my side.

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet


Disprove all that consensus.

"Consensus" isn't science, Gomer.

Do you ever read what you type?

 

[otto105]

How about our national intelligence community in testimony this week.

The list wasn't short. The top U.S. officials contradicted Trump on ISIS. And North Korea. And Iran. And border security. And Russian election interference. At times yesterday, it seemed the top national security officials and the president were serving in entirely different administrations.

But there was another issue that may have been lost in the shuffle yesterday, which Yahoo News highlighted.

In testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats warned that climate change remains a national security threat.

"Global environmental and ecological degradation, as well as climate change, are likely to fuel competition for resources, economic distress, and social discontent through 2019 and beyond," Coats said in the U.S. Intelligence Community's annual "Worldwide Threat Assessment" report. "Climate hazards such as extreme weather, higher temperatures, droughts, floods, wildfires, storms, sea level rise, soil degradation, and acidifying oceans are intensifying, threatening infrastructure, health, and water and food security.

Coats added: "Extreme weather events, many worsened by accelerating sea level rise, will particularly affect urban coastal areas in South Asia, Southeast Asia, and the Western Hemisphere. Damage to communication, energy, and transportation infrastructure could affect low-lying military bases, inflict economic costs, and cause human displacement and loss of life."

This comes just two weeks after Trump's Defense Department issued a related report, noting that climate change is a global security threat.

All of which serves as an important reminder: the president isn't just ignoring scientists and related policy experts; he's also ignoring his own administration.