Alpine glaciers 50% gone by 2050 no matter what

[Donald H]

Considering the GHG of CO2 per doubling of CO2 is only 1C and the predicted feedback is 3.5C from that 1C, it's hardly settled at all. The 1C is based on physics. The 3.5C is based upon flawed computer modeling.

I'm still having a bit of difficulty on accepting you as the world's foremost denialist authority on climate change.
My reservations are most likely on account of your track record on not accepting D. evolution, while pretending you do.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Global warming is an established fact and the scientists researching the topic are being paid to research the topic.

Your belief in global warming in caused by your atheism. When people stop believing in God, they don't believe there is nothing. They believe in everything. Global warming zealots have climate change as their religion.

 

[Lastamender]

I bet he does. Why don't you ask him?

I do not suffer fools. I made an exception for you.

 

[progressive hunter]

I'm still having a bit of difficulty on accepting you as the world's foremost denialist authority on climate change.
My reservations are most likely on account of your track record on not accepting D. evolution, while pretending you do.

you shouldnt be saying anything about other peoples track record when you global warming people have a 100% failure rate on predictions,,

 

[Donald H]

This question too, is rock solidly defined according to the political divide.

The political right are just never going to buy in,
At least until their houses blow away in a storm,
and they're left standing in what was their bedrooms with bare asses. ~

 

[Crick]

I do not suffer fools. I made an exception for you.

Are you on a suicide watch?

 

[Lastamender]

Are you on a suicide watch?

No.

 

[Crick]

Your belief in global warming in caused by your atheism.

Really? Is your rejection of fundamental science caused by your belief in the supernatural?

When people stop believing in God, they don't believe there is nothing.

Not even proper syntax.

They believe in everything.

Uh... does anyone here have a clue what he/she is saying?

Global warming zealots have climate change as their religion.

Except, religions involve the supernatural and unevidenced faith while global warming is a scientific theory supported by mountains of evidence.

What we have here is another example of you making claims for which you have no proof, no evidence, no reasoning, no logical argument... nothing.

 

[progressive hunter]

This question too, is rock solidly defined according to the political divide.

The political right are just never going to buy in,
At least until their houses blow away in a storm,
and they're left standing in what was their bedrooms with bare asses. ~

houses have been blowing away in storms since the begging of mankind,,

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Do you REALLY think all the world's climate scientists could have been running a huge deception for, what, forty years now, with very, very close to 100% cooperation by over ten thousand well-educated individuals from every nation on the planet, producing completely coherent science, who would be putting their entire careers at risk without ever being caught and without a single scientist ever confessing to the scheme? Does that REALLY seem possible to you?

And you did not answer my question about the fossil fuel industy: Would you go so far as to admit that the fossil fuel industries have some motivation to work against the AGW mitigation that will eventually bring their business to a complete end?

yes! absolutely! they are PAID handsomely to be part of the "consensus" And are cast out if they dare to question that High Per Capita American CO2 is the leading cause of manmade global climate warming change!

 

[Crick]

No.

Should you be? I'm just thinking that if you don't suffer fools ("gladly" is the original predicate adverb) you may be having some serious self-worth issues.

 

[Lastamender]

Should you be? I'm just thinking that if you don't suffer fools ("gladly" is the original predicate adverb) you may be having some serious self-worth issues.

Maybe, but it does not make the climate hoax true.

 

[Mac-7]

Alpine glaciers will lose half of their volume by 2050 no matter what humans do (Earth.com)

Alpine glaciers are set to lose at least a third of their volume by 2050, regardless of any immediate halt in global warming, according to scientists from t...

l.smartnews.com

More of the world's limited fresh water poured into the sea.

Only until the next snowfall

 

[Crick]

Maybe, but it does not make the climate hoax true.

No. That would be the mountains of evidence, thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies and fundamental physics, chemistry and thermodynamics.

Tell me, with what portions of the science do you take issue?

 

[progressive hunter]

No. That would be the mountains of evidence, thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies and fundamental physics, chemistry and thermodynamics.

Tell me, with what portions of the science do you take issue?

this may be a little late,,
but when did we establish what the earth is supposed to be as far as temps and CO2 levels,,
do you have a spec sheet??

when my car overheats I know it because I have a spec sheet telling me what it is supposed to be,,

 

[Lastamender]

No. That would be the mountains of evidence, thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies and fundamental physics, chemistry and thermodynamics.

Tell me, with what portions of the science do you take issue?

Paid for bullshit.

 

[Crick]

Paid for bullshit.

You think someone has paid for the physics, chemistry and thermodynamics?

You think someone has paid for the temperature data, the CO2 data, the SST data?

 

[Lastamender]

You think someone has paid for the physics, chemistry and thermodynamics?

You think someone has paid for the temperature data, the CO2 data, the SST data?

Yep.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No. That would be the mountains of evidence, thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies and fundamental physics, chemistry and thermodynamics.

Tell me, with what portions of the science do you take issue?

Mountains of evidence, but not one single repeatable experiment controlling for CO2. Odd that

 

[progressive hunter]

Mountains of evidence, but not one single repeatable experiment controlling for CO2. Odd that

they also lack a spec sheet on what its supposed to be,,

they just take readings and claim its bad and the world will end if we dont tax people more,,

how do we know this isnt the normal progression of the way its supposed to be,,