What, exactly, do warmists think that deniers are denying?

[Iceweasel]

Another one? I begin to discern the roots of denierism. It starts with a complete failure to comprehend the scientific method.

Pointing out hypocrisy is denierism to you? Either it's settled or it isn't. Since it's settled, let's stop the funding and let the politicians by way of the people decide on what to do or not do. Fair enough?

 

[Abraham3]

Are you actually that stupid?

 

[Iceweasel]

Are you actually that stupid?

It's stupid to want to stop paying people to research a done deal?

 

[Abraham3]

[Shakes head]

 

[westwall]

Are you saying we averted an oncoming ice age?

Essentially, yes. We've probably cancelled the next ice age.

However, since that would have happened 50,000 years or so in the future, it wasn't a smart thing to do. It's like cranking up the furnace to maximum heat in June because you know winter will eventually arrive.

Wow. We must be super duper powerful. Cancelling out something we don't even know how it started in the first place.

 

[westwall]

Another one? I begin to discern the roots of denierism. It starts with a complete failure to comprehend the scientific method.

So...do the warmists simply not comprehend the scientific method, or did they abandon it because it interfered with their goals?

 

[westwall]

[Shakes head]

You might as well stamp your feet and go LALALALALA for all the sense your argument makes.

 

[SSDD]

Another one? I begin to discern the roots of denierism. It starts with a complete failure to comprehend the scientific method.

Actually that is the basis for alarmism. Good try goebbels.

 

[IanC]

What, exactly, do warmists think that deniers are denying?

It’s not a matter of ‘denying’ anything but rather a matter of their unfounded, unwarranted fear.

Those who refuse to consider the evidence concerning GCC have contrived this bizarre, inane notion that to seek to address the effects of GCC will somehow result in people being forced to give up their cars and live in multi-family dwellings without air conditioning under a One World Government.

The issue is one of being irrational, not being in denial.

while this is more in the realm of politics and I prefer the science I think you are wrong. deniers and especially skeptics see the issue as being similar to buying insurance at 10,000$ a year when the pay out is only a 100$, IF something happens that is detrimental.

 

[mamooth]

It's stupid to want to stop paying people to research a done deal?

Accodring to Iceweasel, gravity is a done deal, hence money for space exploration is prohibited, unless you're a hypocrite.

Iceweasel illustrates a common trait of most denialists. They stink at logic, which means they stink at the scientific method. That means they fall hard for every bit of pseudoscience woo tossed their way, which is why they post like they do in this forum.

 

[flacaltenn]

Ed -- see for instance....

ftp://pmodwrc.ch/pub/Claus/TSI_longterm/reconstr_TSI_grl_rev_submitted.pdf

PMOD gets the same results on Be iso reconstructions.. And note that very little "modeling" is involved compared to those Global History temperature proxies. It's all from direct measurement in ice core and CLOSED FORM equations.. PMOD gets 0.9 Watt/M2 since Maunder Min. That's a huge chunk of the radiative forcing that we're looking for to explain our piddling little warming bump.. And Yes --- the IPCC has OBFUSCATED that point and outright LIED about it to avoid admitting that CO2 isn't the complete and total answer...

No, they have not.

You really need to get a grasp on the point that you are not smarter or more knowledgeable - in any way - than are several thousand, actively researching PhDs.

Don't care how big you think the army is.. The IPCC is a POLITICAL organization that RENTS scientists.. And MANY of those are pissed about the IPCC misquoting and misinterpreting their work. Specifically on TSI -- the IPCC has attempted to REDEFINE that term to their advantage so that they can speak to SHORT TERM VARIATIONS and ignore the more germane trends on a timescale APPLICABLE to climate change..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

‘I don’t think anybody really knows what’s happening. They just guess’ -- World Renouned Leading Climate Expert and Authority on ManMade Global Climate Warming Change, James Lovelock

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Another one? I begin to discern the roots of denierism. It starts with a complete failure to comprehend the scientific method.

Pointing to the Weather Channel and saying, "Looky there! ManMade Global Climate Warming Change!!" is what passes for " the scientific method"

 

[Iceweasel]

It's stupid to want to stop paying people to research a done deal?

Accodring to Iceweasel, gravity is a done deal, hence money for space exploration is prohibited, unless you're a hypocrite.

Iceweasel illustrates a common trait of most denialists. They stink at logic, which means they stink at the scientific method. That means they fall hard for every bit of pseudoscience woo tossed their way, which is why they post like they do in this forum.

We don't really understand gravity and I don't think the study is a cottage industry so it isn't the same. The analogy would be if "scientists" claimed that man-made pollutants were destroying the gravitational pull and we will all soon fly off the Earth so we better fund, research, pass stringent legislation, fund some more, research some more, pass more laws, etc. and did I mention funding?

Listening to you talk about logic is like a blindman offering to paint your house.

But you avoided the challenge and had nothing to offer but that. If the matter is closed and it's settled we can close the pocketbooks. If we need more research then the matter obviously is not closed. That's a logical statement that you apparently can't deal with.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I enjoy it when the AGW Faithers point to the AGW skeptics and call them "deniers" based on the skeptics' demand FOR actual resort to the scientific method.

 

[Wyld Kard]

o The Earth is getting warmer at a rate unprecedented in millions of years
o That warming is being caused by the Greenhouse Effect operating on increasing levels of GHGs in Earth's atmosphere.
o The primary source of those GHGs are human activities: the combustion of fossil fuel for power and transportation and deforestation for development, mining and agriculture.
o This warming represents a threat to our well being from a number of directions: rising sea level, alterations in rain patterns, alteration in seasonal timing, increased weather intensity and so forth.
o To minimize the harm this process will cause, humans need to minimize their GHG emissions. This is best accomplished by replacing coal and petroleum combustion with renewable sources such as solar (PV and thermal), wind, tide, OTEC, geothermal, hydroelectric as well as nuclear.

So, you agree with all of that, don't you. Any reasonable person would.

More bullshit lies and misinformation from the kool-aid drinking gullible idiot, Dishonest Abe.

The Earth is getting warmer at a rate unprecedented in millions of years

LIAR!

Global warming? No, actually we're cooling, claim scientists - Telegraph

So, you agree with all of that, don't you. Any reasonable person would.

I do not, have not, and will NEVER agree with any of the bullshit lies and misinformation that a kool-aid drinking gullible idiot like yourself or even the shit-for-brains Goldierocks continually spews about global warming. Any reasonable person would NOT.

EVERYTHING ABOUT AGW IS A LIE!

 

[Abraham3]

o The Earth is getting warmer at a rate unprecedented in millions of years
o That warming is being caused by the Greenhouse Effect operating on increasing levels of GHGs in Earth's atmosphere.
o The primary source of those GHGs are human activities: the combustion of fossil fuel for power and transportation and deforestation for development, mining and agriculture.
o This warming represents a threat to our well being from a number of directions: rising sea level, alterations in rain patterns, alteration in seasonal timing, increased weather intensity and so forth.
o To minimize the harm this process will cause, humans need to minimize their GHG emissions. This is best accomplished by replacing coal and petroleum combustion with renewable sources such as solar (PV and thermal), wind, tide, OTEC, geothermal, hydroelectric as well as nuclear.

So, you agree with all of that, don't you. Any reasonable person would.

More bullshit lies and misinformation from the kool-aid drinking gullible idiot, Dishonest Abe.

The Earth is getting warmer at a rate unprecedented in millions of years

LIAR!

Global warming? No, actually we're cooling, claim scientists - Telegraph

So, you agree with all of that, don't you. Any reasonable person would.

I do not, have not, and will NEVER agree with any of the bullshit lies and misinformation that a kool-aid drinking gullible idiot like yourself or even the shit-for-brains Goldierocks continually spews about global warming. Any reasonable person would NOT.

EVERYTHING ABOUT AGW IS A LIE!

It's a shame you can't demonstrate any good evidence supporting your position on any of these points. Cause I can.

 

[SSDD]

It's a shame you can't demonstrate any good evidence supporting your position on any of these points. Cause I can.

No you can't. You can recite a version of a hypothesis based upon assumptions, guesses, fudge factors, and computer models, which makes predictions regarding changes in the atmosphere which don't happen and the total hypothetical effect has never been measured.

Now in your own tiny little brainwashed mind, that may rise to the level of evidence, but out here in the real world, it isn't even close. Show us an actual quantified measurement of the greenhouse effect. Show us repeatable experimental evidence that adding X amount of CO2, or any of the so called greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere will cause Y amount of warming. Explain why the greenhouse hypothesis is not able to accurately predict the temperature of any of the other planets in the solar system with atmospheres. Tell us why the hot spot in the troposphere predicted by the greenhouse hypothesis hasn't materialized. Tell us why the data from tens of thousands of radiosondes don't show the increased cooling in the stratosphere that the greenhouse hypothesis predicts.

I could go on asking for explanations for the multitude of failures of the greenhouse hypothesis and by default the AGW hypothesis but you will be completely unable to answer the few above, so asking more questions of a mute wall is pointless. The fact is that one failure of a hypothesis is enough to reject it and the greenhouse hypothesis and its offspring the AGW hypothesis have experienced failure after failure and they are kept alive through the sheer force of politics...science would have discarded them decades ago if not for the money politics is willing to throw at them to keep them alive.

 

[Abraham3]

Is your name Wildcard?

 

[SSDD]

Is your name Wildcard?

No answers huh? Not surprising... I wouldn't have asked had there been answers. Just pointing out how brainwashed you are and according to the forum rules, I don't have to raise my hand and wait to be acknowledged to point out what a dupe you are.