This is why there’s been so much extreme rainfall and flooding in the U.S.

[BULLDOG]

Apparently you aren’t getting it. Studying the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record and understanding why abrupt changes have been occurring for the past 3 million years is the best way to understand what will happen in the future.

I agree 100%. As soon a you show some reason to believe your evaluation of the facts is more valid than the experts, I'll jump on your band wagon.

 

[ding]

That's why I don't bother spouting charts and graphs like you do. It's an interesting subject, and I do read up on it occasionally, but I know I'll never be knowledgeable enough to second guess the experts who have earned their credentials. Unless you can give me reason to believe otherwise, I don't think you will be either. When given the choice to believe either the credentialled experts in the field, or some unqualified anonymous poster on the internet, I'll go with the experts every time.

It’s been politicized which is the only reason you are interested in it. There’s no science being performed. Just flawed computer modeling.

 

[ding]

I agree 100%. As soon a you show some reason to believe your evaluation of the facts is more valid than the experts, I'll jump on your band wagon.

There is absolutely nothing that will convince you. You are an ideologue. If the planet cooling for millions of years with CO2 greater than 600 ppm or the last interglacial cycle being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less atmospheric CO2 than today doesn’t convince you, then nothing will.

You are just going to have to wait for the AMOC to switch off and plunge the northern hemisphere into frigid temperatures. Because that’s when all this nonsense is going to end.

 

[BULLDOG]

It’s been politicized which is the only reason you are interested in it. There’s no science being performed. Just flawed computer modeling.

It' a good thing you are conducting all that science then isn't it? Keep me informed about the tests you are running.

 

[ding]

It' a good thing you are conducting all that science then isn't it? Keep me informed about the tests you are running.

You mean like the theoretical surface warming without adjusting for convective wind currents is 1C per doubling of CO2?

Why do you suppose it would be anything more than that?

 

[BULLDOG]

There is absolutely nothing that will convince you. You are an ideologue. If the planet cooling for millions of years with CO2 greater than 600 ppm or the last interglacial cycle being 2C warmer than today with 120 ppm less atmospheric CO2 than today doesn’t convince you, then nothing will.

You are just going to have to wait for the AMOC to switch off and plunge the northern hemisphere into frigid temperatures. Because that’s when all this nonsense is going to end.

Damn. You haven't read a word I have written, have you? I will be convinced in the blink of an eye a soon as the majority of qualified scientists come up with something better. Sorry, but your credentials just don't quite void theirs. You're arguing details. Prove your credibility, and then we can discuss details. Maga has destroyed your belief in the foundations of our way of life. . Is there a single non-maga thing you believe?

 

[BULLDOG]

You mean like the theoretical surface warming without adjusting for convective wind currents is 1C per doubling of CO2?

Why do you suppose it would be anything more than that?

That's what I'm talking about. Explain the apparatus you are using to determine if those number are accurate. Anything less would be nothing more than working on models, and we know you vehemently opposed that.

 

[ding]

Damn. You haven't read a word I have written, have you? I will be convinced in the blink of an eye a soon as the majority of qualified scientists come up with something better. Sorry, but your credentials just don't quite void theirs. You're arguing details. Prove your credibility, and then we can discuss details. Maga has destroyed your belief in the foundations of our way of life. . Is there a single non-maga thing you believe?

I have been reading what you wrote. That’s how I know you are a political ideologue on a political mission. Science isn’t a popularity contest. Science is constantly challenging itself. You want to squelch all challenges because that’s what political ideologues do.

 

[BULLDOG]

I have been reading what you wrote. That’s how I know you are a political ideologue on a political mission. Science isn’t a popularity contest. Science is constantly challenging itself. You want to squelch all challenges because that’s what political ideologues do.

Because I prefer to use the most qualified sources for thing I'm not personally expert in? Would you go to a mechanic for medical advice? Would you go to a surgeon to change out your upper control arm? Would you go to some internet nutbag like Glenn Beck for information on climate change? ------ Oh wait......
I noticed you didn't answer my question. Is there any non-maga approved thing you still believe?

 

[ding]

Because I prefer to use the most qualified sources for thing I'm not personally expert in? Would you go to a mechanic for medical advice? Would you go to a surgeon to change out your upper control arm? Would you go to some internet nutbag like Glenn Beck for information on climate change? ------ Oh wait......
I noticed you didn't answer my question. Is there any non-maga approved thing you still believe?

I get that you believe what you believe because experts have told you to believe it.

I never accept anything blindly. Did your experts tell you to blindly believe them and never challenge what they claim?

 

[BULLDOG]

I get that you believe what you believe because experts have told you to believe it.

I never accept anything blindly. Did your experts tell you to blindly believe them and never challenge what they claim?

No. Actually, they never told me to do anything. I choose to go with the most qualified source for things I am not personally expert in. I haven't received my Instant Internet Expert degree yet. Do you think I'm wrong for going with the most qualified information available? Describe the scenario where a less qualified opinion would be preferable.

 

[ding]

No. Actually, they never told me to do anything. I choose to go with the most qualified source for things I am not personally expert in. I haven't received my Instant Internet Expert degree yet.

And yet here you are blindly accepting what you were told to believe trying to squelch all challenges. Just like what political ideologues do.

 

[BULLDOG]

And yet here you are blindly accepting what you were told to believe trying to squelch all challenges. Just like what political ideologues do.

Far from blindly. I make efforts to determine most qualified sources. Experienced experts > anonymous internet nutbags

 

[Sunsettommy]

Damn. You haven't read a word I have written, have you? I will be convinced in the blink of an eye a soon as the majority of qualified scientists come up with something better. Sorry, but your credentials just don't quite void theirs. You're arguing details. Prove your credibility, and then we can discuss details. Maga has destroyed your belief in the foundations of our way of life. . Is there a single non-maga thing you believe?

LOL, it doesn't take a "majority" of scientists just one will do as Albert Einstein himself stated as per a reproducible published paper.......

I am non Maga, didn't vote for Trump and never bought any MAGA stuff, I go by well, published science research that shows a lot of natural causes for warming or a cooling trend.

There is nothing unusual climate wise today, what is unusual are the high number of science illiterates conned by leftist democrats to follow and support a SCAM because that is what it is when everything is driven by government to push this pseudoscience onto the world and their solutions are always the same give them a lot of power to fix a nonexistent problem when the real intention is to control YOU instead.

This entire Scam are being driven by governments, from the IPCC, from the National assessment reports, by science organizations under direct government influence and by government paid scientists which is why the lies are common the real world never lines up with their bogus narratives.

There is no Climate Emergency ongoing, it is all media propaganda as the OFFICIAL data doesn't support it at all.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Far from blindly. I make efforts to determine most qualified sources. Experienced experts > anonymous internet nutbags

Now you are LYING!

You have been shown a lot of OFFICIAL data, and you keep ignoring it because it doesn't fit in your warmest/alarmist views.

 

[BULLDOG]

LOL, it doesn't take a "majority" of scientists just one will do as Albert Einstein himself stated as per a reproducible published paper.......

I am non Maga, didn't vote for Trump and never bought any MAGA stuff, I go by well, published science research that shows a lot of natural causes for warming or a cooling trend.

There is nothing unusual climate wise today, what is unusual are the high number of science illiterates conned by leftist democrats to follow and support a SCAM because that is what it is when everything is driven by government to push this pseudoscience onto the world and their solutions are always the same give them a lot of power to fix a nonexistent problem when the real intention is to control YOU instead.

This entire Scam are being driven by governments, from the IPCC, from the National assessment reports, by science organizations under direct government influence and by government paid scientists which is why the lies are common the real world never lines up with their bogus narratives.

There is no Climate Emergency ongoing, it is all media propaganda as the OFFICIAL data doesn't support it at all.

Yep, and how long did it take for the scientific community to verify and accept his claims? Of course, there will always be a few holdouts. I don't think any magas here are Einstein.

 

[BULLDOG]

Now you are LYING!

You have been shown a lot of OFFICIAL data, and you keep ignoring it because it doesn't fit in your warmest/alarmist views.

Do you think the vast majority of scientists haven't seen that OFFICIAL data? Their evaluation doesn't match most anonymous nutbags on the internet.

 

[EMH]

Do you think the vast majority of scientists haven't seen that OFFICIAL data?

LOL!!!

LMFAO!!!

They are the ones that FUDGED the data, so yeah, they saw, they fudged, you parroted...

 

[BULLDOG]

LOL!!!

LMFAO!!!

They are the ones that FUDGED the data, so yeah, they saw, they fudged, you parroted...

Well make up your mind. I'm attacked and accused of ignoring official data, and now you say that official data is flawed. Which is it?

 

[EMH]

Well make up your mind. I'm attacked and accused of ignoring official data, and now you say that official data is flawed. Which is it?

LOL!!

IQ over 5 required to understand difference between data and fudge.

Data comes from instruments -

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

"satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling." = THE ACTUAL DATA FROM THE INSTRUMENTS

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data.

CAN YOU SEE ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST HERE?

ADMIT THE TRUTH THAT INCREASING ATMOSPHERIC CO2 HAS NOT WARMED ANYTHING, ADMIT YOU ARE 100% WRONG, YOU DESERVE NO MORE FUNDING

or

FUDGE THE DATA AND KEEP BILKING THE TAXPAYER


????