The Planet is Heating Up Faster than Models Predict -- James Hansen

[Weatherman2020]

Once in a while you might try actually reading a linked article. Hansen's study concludes that climate sensitivity is higher than currently held.

Hindcasting - testing ones model and the inputs you feed it - is standard practice in climate modeling. Your contention here that they consistently failed is simply a lie.

Hindcasting - testing ones model and the inputs you feed it - is standard practice in climate modeling. Your contention here that they consistently failed is simply a lie.

And so far out of 130 doomsday predictions, a grand total of ZERO have been correct.

 

[Crick]

And so far out of 130 doomsday predictions, a grand total of ZERO have been correct.

Odd that you don't list them where it would be obvious that they were not the predictions of mainstream science.

Since you did not defend your claim, I assume you're admitting your contention models consistently failed at hindcasting was a lie.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And so far out of 130 doomsday predictions, a grand total of ZERO have been correct.

Arctic Ice free? Check
Guam tipped over? Check
Cat 6 Hurricanes? Check
Greta's childhood stolen? Check

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Number of experiments showing a temperature rise from increasing CO2 to 420PPM Is still zero

 

[Crick]

Arctic Ice free? Check
Guam tipped over? Check
Cat 6 Hurricanes? Check
Greta's childhood stolen? Check

Care to show us the mainstream scientists actually making those predictions? Any of them?

If you can't (and you know you can't) you could either retract them or admit to the lies.

 

[Flash]

Models are a scam.

Shit in shit out computer programs created by scammed Environmental Wacko research money.

 

[Crick]

Models are a scam.

Shit in shit out computer programs created by scammed Environmental Wacko research money.

You know that you don't know what you're talking about which means you know you're lying. Why do you choose to lie when your lies will cause people to be harmed? Are you really that bad of a human being?

 

[Captain Caveman]

Come on Crick , you're all science for the climate but not for sexes. What a fucking pile of shit you are. In one hand, you lick the ring piece of scientists over the climate, then in the other hand you throw them under the bus with sex and gender. You are just the typical pile of shit in society.

Here's a big phrase, "Consistency of thought". Go look it up and sort your fucking self out because you're wasting the planets oxygen.

 

[Crick]

Come on Crick , you're all science for the climate but not for sexes. What a fucking pile of shit you are. In one hand, you lick the ring piece of scientists over the climate, then in the other hand you throw them under the bus with sex and gender. You are just the typical pile of shit in society.

Here's a big phrase, "Consistency of thought". Go look it up and sort your fucking self out because you're wasting the planets oxygen.

To what are you referring wrt sex and gender?

 

[Captain Caveman]

To what are you referring wrt sex and gender?

I'm refering to science, you know, that institution that you follow hook line sinker on the climate destruction of the planet. Gender is a play on words, science claims theres two sexes, the freaks concerned about their gender want to change sex because gender apparently has nothing to do with sex. So do you believe climate scientists but ignore biology scientists? Fucking simple question, even if your IQ is one point above your shoe size.

 

[jc456]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/02/climate/the-planet-is-heating-up-faster-than-predicted-says-scientist-who-first-warned-the-world-about-climate-change/index.html

James Hansen whose 1988 testimony before Congress was the first many had heard of global warming, has co-published a study in which he claims that the globe is warming faster than models predict primarily because of reductions in aerosol emissions from China and internationally from shipping. Michael Mann disagrees, noting that the truth is bad enough. Hansen says the 1.5C threshold is dead as a doornail and keeping us withing 2C by 2050 will require concerted effort. Hansen suggests we consider the use of solar geoengineering though several other experts warn that such a strategy poses severe dangers. The article notes that June, July, August, September and October of this year have all set monthly global temperature records

Noble Michael would be proud….

In the paper, published Thursday in the journal Oxford Open Climate Change, Hansen and more than a dozen other scientists used a combination of paleoclimate data, including data from polar ice cores and tree rings, climate models and observational data, to conclude that the Earth is much more sensitive to climate change than previously understood.

 

[LeroyDumonde]

Every time their models are wrong climate cultists claim that it only proves their theory correct. This is exactly what religious fanatics do when their doomsday prophecies fail.

 

[Crick]

Come on Crick, you're all science for the climate but not for sexes. What a fucking pile of shit you are. In one hand, you lick the ring piece of scientists over the climate, then in the other hand you throw them under the bus with sex and gender. You are just the typical pile of shit in society.

Here's a big phrase, "Consistency of thought". Go look it up and sort your fucking self out because you're wasting the planets oxygen.

I'm refering to science, you know, that institution that you follow hook line sinker on the climate destruction of the planet. Gender is a play on words, science claims theres two sexes, the freaks concerned about their gender want to change sex because gender apparently has nothing to do with sex. So do you believe climate scientists but ignore biology scientists? Fucking simple question, even if your IQ is one point above your shoe size.

You say that "in the other hand", I throw them [scientists] under the bus with sex and gender". What have I said regarding sex and gender that you believe throws scientists under the bus.

PS: That should have been "ON one hand..." and "ON the other hand...".

 

[Crick]

You say that "in the other hand", I throw them [scientists] under the bus with sex and gender". What have I said regarding sex and gender that you believe throws scientists under the bus.

PS: That should have been "ON one hand..." and "ON the other hand...".

Still waiting for an answer.

 

[ding]

Still waiting for an answer.

Then maybe you should have replied to his post instead of yours.

 

[Crick]

Then maybe you should have replied to his post instead of yours.

He's had his chance.

 

[ding]

He's had his chance.

Then why say you are still waiting for an answer?

 

[Crick]

Then why say you are still waiting for an answer?

Because I am. That doesn't mean he deserves a knock at his door.

 

[ding]

Because I am. That doesn't mean he deserves a knock at his door.

Then you should have replied to him to alert him to your post. That you didn't implies you didn't really want him to reply.

 

[Crick]

Then you should have replied to him to alert him to your post. That you didn't implies you didn't really want him to reply.

This doesn't involve you. There are a great many things in the world that don't involve you. Grow up and learn when to step back.