Climate Change Deniers Claim to Understand Science

[CrusaderFrank]

Warmers need to save the planet and commit harakiri

 

[Bugler]

Turn on the Weather Channel! That proves Climate Change!

DENIER!!

What a group of fucking morons. Biggest collection of fucking morons that ever graced this once great nation

Per the rules:

Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking or derailing threads."

 

[Freewill]

Doesn't really matter if those who are not scared of a few degrees rise in temperature understand science. And i have not heard that claim made. What we do know is that the GW fearists are full of crap. We are not buying the fear.

Is that it? You call that a rebuttal? I guess that's as deep as your understanding goes when all your science comes from FOX News. That's about as much science as they need.

OK, I rebutted your opinion with my opinion, sounds like we are both guilty of the crime you alledge.

So let's start with information from NOAA:

View attachment 43103

Not only is an unprovenienced graph meaningless, it isn't even relevant to GLOBAL WARMING, since it is only claiming to portray temperatures here in the U.S.

I am not being mean but did you actually mean, unprovenanced? If so then I guess the NOAA emblem in the background was indication enough? Anyway I have posted this link several times. Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

I realize that the US is not the world but we are in the world. How the world can warm and the US not is a great mystery to me. And no heating one area does NOT cool another.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Why did the name change from Global Warming to Climate Change?

Thanks.

It didn't!

Why are you stupid enough to think it did?

Thanks.

But it did. Look at the OP's title. Just curious why the marketing label changed from Global Warming to Climate Change. Did Global Warming not do well in focus groups?

Why do you believe it is a market label? Do you also believe that all scientists think and act like retail businessmen?

Yes.....when their livelihood's depend on it.

And what livelihood are they marketing?

There is an entire industry that feeds off the Global Warming hysteria. There are hundreds if not thousands of scientist who live off the Global Warming teat.

Christ dude....wake the fuck up.

 

[Bugler]

Ran across this just now. You see EVERTHING with these Globull warmers. WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE unless you give up your lifestyle and all your monies and LIVES over to these Politicians

Mother frikken Jones. that commie rag has been around since I was born. For crying out loud

SNIP:

ENVIRONMENT
→Climate Change,Climate Desk,Energy,Health,Science,Top Stories
Global Warming Is Now a "Medical Emergency" That Could Wipe Out 50 Years of Global Health Gains
Here's what we can do to stop that from happening.
—ByBryan Schatz

| Wed Jun. 24, 2015 6:00 AM EDT

Air pollution in Delhi, IndiaJean-Etienne Minh-Duy Poirrier/Flickr

Climate change, if left unchecked, threatens to undermine the last half century of gains in global health. That's the conclusion of astudyreleased Monday by an international commission convened by theLancet, a prestigious medical journal based in the UK.

Declaring it a "medical emergency," the authors argued that the potential impacts of global warming—such as floods, drought, heat stress, catastrophic storms, the spread of disease, and increased food insecurity—pose a "potentially catastrophic risk" to human health.

ALL OF IT HERE on some STUDY DONE in the UK
Global Warming Is Now a Medical Emergency That Could Wipe Out 50 Years of Global Health Gains Mother Jones

Your post is a classic example of what the OP is talking about. You did read the OP, right?

 

[Bugler]

Doesn't really matter if those who are not scared of a few degrees rise in temperature understand science. And i have not heard that claim made. What we do know is that the GW fearists are full of crap. We are not buying the fear.

Is that it? You call that a rebuttal? I guess that's as deep as your understanding goes when all your science comes from FOX News. That's about as much science as they need.

OK, I rebutted your opinion with my opinion, sounds like we are both guilty of the crime you alledge.

So let's start with information from NOAA:

View attachment 43103

Not only is an unprovenienced graph meaningless, it isn't even relevant to GLOBAL WARMING, since it is only claiming to portray temperatures here in the U.S.

I am not being mean but did you actually mean, unprovenanced? If so then I guess the NOAA emlem in the background was indication enough? Anyway I have posted this link several times. Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

I realize that the US is not the world but we are in the world. How the world can warm and the US not is a great mystery to me. And no heating one area does NOT cool another.

It is not enough to post a graph. You must put it into the proper context in which it was crafted. Then you must cite your source, not simply rely on a logo. You realize that 12 years of U.S. climate data does not represent 12 years of global data, right? RIGHT? How can the world warm and the U.S. not? The same way that the arctic is cold but Brazil is not.

 

[Bugler]

It didn't!

Why are you stupid enough to think it did?

Thanks.

But it did. Look at the OP's title. Just curious why the marketing label changed from Global Warming to Climate Change. Did Global Warming not do well in focus groups?

Why do you believe it is a market label? Do you also believe that all scientists think and act like retail businessmen?

Yes.....when their livelihood's depend on it.

And what livelihood are they marketing?

There is an entire industry that feeds off the Global Warming hysteria. There are hundreds if not thousands of scientist who live off the Global Warming teat.

Christ dude....wake the fuck up.

There are thousands of doctors making a living being doctors as well. Not sure you have a relevant point here.

 

[Stephanie]

This was a comment from the article with Mother earthly Jone rag I posted above:
snip:
The UN/IPCC is not a scientific organization, it is a propagands organ of the UN. As Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-Chairman of the IPCC’s Working Group 3 has stated on the record:

"One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/201...

from:
Global Warming Is Now a Medical Emergency That Could Wipe Out 50 Years of Global Health Gains Mother Jones

OH, look what else I ran across:
Chuck Schumer: Carbon tax has a chance if Clinton wins
ByELANA SCHOR

6/23/15 7:28 PM EDT

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) outlined a path Tuesday for Hillary Clinton to enact a carbon tax if the Democrats prevail in the 2016 elections.

Schumer, the Senate Democrats’ leader-in-waiting, said that a Clinton presidency and the return of his party to the Senate majority in 2017 could pave the way for lawmakers to enact a carbon tax to help fund the government.



Read more:Chuck Schumer Carbon tax has a chance if Clinton wins - Elana Schor - POLITICO

 

[SSDD]

You are so stupid you can't even see that you are presenting models as evidence when you've said you will not accept them as evidence. I guess that is the ultimate blessing of a merciful god.

One of us is stupid...and a dupe but alas, it is not me. You fail to grasp that failure is evidence...and failed models are evidence of failure...That they keep adjusting the claimed climate sensitivity towards zero is evidence that they realize that the divergence between reality and the model predictions can not continue...so they slowly work towards reality which is a climate sensitivity to CO2 of zero or less.

 

[Freewill]

Doesn't really matter if those who are not scared of a few degrees rise in temperature understand science. And i have not heard that claim made. What we do know is that the GW fearists are full of crap. We are not buying the fear.

Is that it? You call that a rebuttal? I guess that's as deep as your understanding goes when all your science comes from FOX News. That's about as much science as they need.

OK, I rebutted your opinion with my opinion, sounds like we are both guilty of the crime you alledge.

So let's start with information from NOAA:

View attachment 43103

Not only is an unprovenienced graph meaningless, it isn't even relevant to GLOBAL WARMING, since it is only claiming to portray temperatures here in the U.S.

I am not being mean but did you actually mean, unprovenanced? If so then I guess the NOAA emlem in the background was indication enough? Anyway I have posted this link several times. Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

I realize that the US is not the world but we are in the world. How the world can warm and the US not is a great mystery to me. And no heating one area does NOT cool another.

It is not enough to post a graph. You must put it into the proper context in which it was crafted. Then you must cite your source, not simply rely on a logo. You realize that 12 years of U.S. climate data does not represent 12 years of global data, right? RIGHT? How can the world warm and the U.S. not? The same way that the arctic is cold but Brazil is not.

OK, you now have the source, I usually always post the source but forgot this time. I try to remember because it makes it too easy for folks like you when I don't.

I thought the arctic was warming? Of course it is still cold as hell but warming according to NOAA but I don't have that information at hand that is certainly what they are telling us. So if the WORLD is warming why isn't the US warming, according to NOAA? It makes no sense.

 

[SSDD]

You don't know anything of the sort. You only know what others have told you.

So you are psychic now? You know how I arrived at my position? You get further and further away from reality all the time.

 

[Bugler]

Is that it? You call that a rebuttal? I guess that's as deep as your understanding goes when all your science comes from FOX News. That's about as much science as they need.

OK, I rebutted your opinion with my opinion, sounds like we are both guilty of the crime you alledge.

So let's start with information from NOAA:

View attachment 43103

Not only is an unprovenienced graph meaningless, it isn't even relevant to GLOBAL WARMING, since it is only claiming to portray temperatures here in the U.S.

I am not being mean but did you actually mean, unprovenanced? If so then I guess the NOAA emlem in the background was indication enough? Anyway I have posted this link several times. Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

I realize that the US is not the world but we are in the world. How the world can warm and the US not is a great mystery to me. And no heating one area does NOT cool another.

It is not enough to post a graph. You must put it into the proper context in which it was crafted. Then you must cite your source, not simply rely on a logo. You realize that 12 years of U.S. climate data does not represent 12 years of global data, right? RIGHT? How can the world warm and the U.S. not? The same way that the arctic is cold but Brazil is not.

OK, you now have the source, I usually always post the source but forgot this time. I try to remember because it makes it too easy for folks like you when I don't.

I thought the arctic was warming? Of course it is still cold as hell but warming according to NOAA but I don't have that information at hand that is certainly what they are telling us. So if the WORLD is warming why isn't the US warming, according to NOAA? It makes no sense.

A source citation from a website should include a link. Got anything like that?

The Arctic is warming. But it is still a very cold place. The U.S. IS warming. We can talk about this in depth if you want to start another thread. This tread is not about the climate data. It is about the ridiculous tactics deniers use. Please read the OP.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

OK, I rebutted your opinion with my opinion, sounds like we are both guilty of the crime you alledge.

So let's start with information from NOAA:

View attachment 43103

Not only is an unprovenienced graph meaningless, it isn't even relevant to GLOBAL WARMING, since it is only claiming to portray temperatures here in the U.S.

I am not being mean but did you actually mean, unprovenanced? If so then I guess the NOAA emlem in the background was indication enough? Anyway I have posted this link several times. Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

I realize that the US is not the world but we are in the world. How the world can warm and the US not is a great mystery to me. And no heating one area does NOT cool another.

It is not enough to post a graph. You must put it into the proper context in which it was crafted. Then you must cite your source, not simply rely on a logo. You realize that 12 years of U.S. climate data does not represent 12 years of global data, right? RIGHT? How can the world warm and the U.S. not? The same way that the arctic is cold but Brazil is not.

OK, you now have the source, I usually always post the source but forgot this time. I try to remember because it makes it too easy for folks like you when I don't.

I thought the arctic was warming? Of course it is still cold as hell but warming according to NOAA but I don't have that information at hand that is certainly what they are telling us. So if the WORLD is warming why isn't the US warming, according to NOAA? It makes no sense.

A source citation from a website should include a link. Got anything like that?

The Arctic is warming. But it is still a very cold place. The U.S. IS warming. We can talk about this in depth if you want to start another thread. This tread is not about the climate data. It is about the ridiculous tactics deniers use. Please read the OP.

The US is cooling

 

[Bugler]

Not only is an unprovenienced graph meaningless, it isn't even relevant to GLOBAL WARMING, since it is only claiming to portray temperatures here in the U.S.

I am not being mean but did you actually mean, unprovenanced? If so then I guess the NOAA emlem in the background was indication enough? Anyway I have posted this link several times. Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

I realize that the US is not the world but we are in the world. How the world can warm and the US not is a great mystery to me. And no heating one area does NOT cool another.

It is not enough to post a graph. You must put it into the proper context in which it was crafted. Then you must cite your source, not simply rely on a logo. You realize that 12 years of U.S. climate data does not represent 12 years of global data, right? RIGHT? How can the world warm and the U.S. not? The same way that the arctic is cold but Brazil is not.

OK, you now have the source, I usually always post the source but forgot this time. I try to remember because it makes it too easy for folks like you when I don't.

I thought the arctic was warming? Of course it is still cold as hell but warming according to NOAA but I don't have that information at hand that is certainly what they are telling us. So if the WORLD is warming why isn't the US warming, according to NOAA? It makes no sense.

A source citation from a website should include a link. Got anything like that?

The Arctic is warming. But it is still a very cold place. The U.S. IS warming. We can talk about this in depth if you want to start another thread. This tread is not about the climate data. It is about the ridiculous tactics deniers use. Please read the OP.

The US is cooling

Start a new thread, and then prove it. Good luck with that.

 

[edthecynic]

Apparently all the deniers have to work with are false equivalencies.
How science deniers use false equivalence - Skeptical Raptor

Why did the name change from Global Warming to Climate Change?

Thanks.

It didn't!

Why are you stupid enough to think it did?

Thanks.

oh YES IT DID. how can you live with yourself lying to the people?

And there you have it, deniers continue to religiously cling to their lies even after confronted with the truth.
Thank you.

Wow

Ed snorts the AGW KoolAid straight from the can.

You prove my point.
Thank you.

 

[Liminal]

You don't know anything of the sort. You only know what others have told you.

So you are psychic now? You know how I arrived at my position? You get further and further away from reality all the time.

It doesn't take a psychic or a scientist to see that none of you guys knows anything about any kind of science. You only know what you're told.

 

[Freewill]

I am not being mean but did you actually mean, unprovenanced? If so then I guess the NOAA emlem in the background was indication enough? Anyway I have posted this link several times. Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

I realize that the US is not the world but we are in the world. How the world can warm and the US not is a great mystery to me. And no heating one area does NOT cool another.

It is not enough to post a graph. You must put it into the proper context in which it was crafted. Then you must cite your source, not simply rely on a logo. You realize that 12 years of U.S. climate data does not represent 12 years of global data, right? RIGHT? How can the world warm and the U.S. not? The same way that the arctic is cold but Brazil is not.

OK, you now have the source, I usually always post the source but forgot this time. I try to remember because it makes it too easy for folks like you when I don't.

I thought the arctic was warming? Of course it is still cold as hell but warming according to NOAA but I don't have that information at hand that is certainly what they are telling us. So if the WORLD is warming why isn't the US warming, according to NOAA? It makes no sense.

A source citation from a website should include a link. Got anything like that?

The Arctic is warming. But it is still a very cold place. The U.S. IS warming. We can talk about this in depth if you want to start another thread. This tread is not about the climate data. It is about the ridiculous tactics deniers use. Please read the OP.

The US is cooling

Start a new thread, and then prove it. Good luck with that.

You have already seen the chart from NOAA showing cooling from 2000. So i did another from 2003 becaue it looked like 2001 and 2000 were abnormally high, still it shows cooling not warming.

Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

 

[WelfareQueen]

You don't know anything of the sort. You only know what others have told you.

So you are psychic now? You know how I arrived at my position? You get further and further away from reality all the time.

It doesn't take a psychic or a scientist to see that none of you guys knows anything about any kind of science. You only know what you're told.

The science has been deeply wrong more often than not. Virtually every prediction regarding Global Waring has been wrong.

For example....the prediction that Global Warming would accelerate over the last 15 years. Remember that one?

The prediction was dead wrong. Global Warming has not accelerated....it has slowed down or reversed over that time frame.

Remember in the late 1970's when climate scientist were saying we were heading into a new Ice Age?

Science knows far less than it pretends.

 

[Old Rocks]

You don't know anything of the sort. You only know what others have told you.

So you are psychic now? You know how I arrived at my position? You get further and further away from reality all the time.

It doesn't take a psychic or a scientist to see that none of you guys knows anything about any kind of science. You only know what you're told.

The science has been deeply wrong more often than not. Virtually every prediction regarding Global Waring has been wrong.

For example....the prediction that Global Warming would accelerate over the last 15 years. Remember that one?

The prediction was dead wrong. Global Warming has not accelerated....it has slowed down or reversed over that time frame.

Remember in the late 1970's when climate scientist were saying we were heading into a new Ice Age?

Science knows far less than it pretends.

Ms. WelfareQueen, just dumb, that is the only way to characterize your post. No, the scientists were not saying in the '70's that we were headed into an ice age. The predictions made by scientists like Dr. James Hansen have not only happened, most have happened sooner than the scientists expected.

 

[Old Rocks]

It is not enough to post a graph. You must put it into the proper context in which it was crafted. Then you must cite your source, not simply rely on a logo. You realize that 12 years of U.S. climate data does not represent 12 years of global data, right? RIGHT? How can the world warm and the U.S. not? The same way that the arctic is cold but Brazil is not.

OK, you now have the source, I usually always post the source but forgot this time. I try to remember because it makes it too easy for folks like you when I don't.

I thought the arctic was warming? Of course it is still cold as hell but warming according to NOAA but I don't have that information at hand that is certainly what they are telling us. So if the WORLD is warming why isn't the US warming, according to NOAA? It makes no sense.

A source citation from a website should include a link. Got anything like that?

The Arctic is warming. But it is still a very cold place. The U.S. IS warming. We can talk about this in depth if you want to start another thread. This tread is not about the climate data. It is about the ridiculous tactics deniers use. Please read the OP.

The US is cooling

Start a new thread, and then prove it. Good luck with that.

You have already seen the chart from NOAA showing cooling from 2000. So i did another from 2003 becaue it looked like 2001 and 2000 were abnormally high, still it shows cooling not warming.

View attachment 43107

Climate at a Glance National Centers for Environmental Information NCEI

Mr. Freewill, the subject is global warming. The US represents less than 2% of the world's surface, and while the US, if you include only the lower 48, has seen a small amount of cooling, the world has been steadily warming. Include Alaska, and the US has seen major warming.