Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

[SAT]

Nice speech, but you're incorrect. This is science. Climate science is science, and climate skeptics are eating crow. Bon appetit!

 

[Oddball]

The responses are better then the article! I love this assertion...

"Statistically, this isn't true, the trend in global temperature has still been increasing. Don't fall into the trap of comparing single points in a noisy signal - that is not the way to determine a long term trend. More importantly, the physical reality is that the planet is still accumulating heat. There is still an energy imbalance. Satellites and ocean heat measurements find more energy is still coming in than going out."

The first statement is an outright fib. Any "warming" that has been "observed" is well within the error bands of the statisitical analysis.

The second statement flies in the face of reality. How does a planet "accumulate heat"?
If there is an energy imbalance please show where that energy is stored. The third statement is likewise a fib, the satellites do not show more energy going in then coming out. And here's where they divorce themselves from the basic fundamental physical laws of the universe as we know it, if there were energy going in it would be warming the oceans, there is ZERO data to support that.

Thus they are asking you to believe that heat is trapped in the cold, cold depths of the oceans. A thinking person would figure out pretty quick that that violates at least two Laws of Physics.

Try again buckwheat, this only shows how divorced from reality they are.

LOLOLOL....you are such a funny delusional fruitcake, walleyedretard. As usual, your ignorance and room temperature IQ prevent you from comprehending what you read and you moronically assume that because you can't understand it, it must be wrong. You have consistently demonstrated a basic misunderstanding of the laws of physics and of science in general. As usual, you are wrong about everything and just making up wild BS that has no connection to reality, and on top of that you are apparently so lost in your own personal little fantasy world that you imagine anyone gives two hoots about your unsupported and very mistaken assertions about how wrong all of the world's climate scientists really are. You poor confused bamboozled dufus.

A very typical Warmista post, composed entirley of ad hominem attacks and not one shred of reason or evidence at all.

That's our Trolling Blunder!

 

[Si modo]

Nice speech, but you're incorrect. This is science. Climate science is science, and climate skeptics are eating crow. Bon appetit!

And thank you for your strawman.

It tells us so much about your 'knowledge' in the topic.

 

[Oddball]

Nice speech, but you're incorrect. This is science. Climate science is science, and climate skeptics are eating crow. Bon appetit!

 

[SAT]

What strawman?

 

[Si modo]

What strawman?

The only person who has said climate science is not science is you, so you are arguing with yourself on that.

 

[SAT]

There is no circular reasoning, either.

You two are not understanding the terms that you use.

 

[SAT]

What strawman?

The only person who has said climate science is not science is you, so you are arguing with yourself on that.

I said the opposite. That climate science is science.

 

[Si modo]

There is no circular reasoning, either.

You two are not understanding the terms that you use.

The only person saying that climate science is not science is you.

Do you have a point to make?

 

[Si modo]

What strawman?

The only person who has said climate science is not science is you, so you are arguing with yourself on that.

I said the opposite. That climate science is science.

No one said it wasn't.

What is your point?

 

[SAT]

You did, post 181.

 

[Oddball]

There is no circular reasoning, either.

You two are not understanding the terms that you use.

The claim that "This is science. Climate science is science..." is classic circular reasoning...Little wonder you can be so easily duped by the warmist cult.

 

[SAT]

Well, no. It's a way of stating that there's a subset of science called climate science.

 

[daveman]

Yes, dumb ass, Dr. James Hansen. The man that is respected around the world as the foremost climatologist in the world.

Education:

B.A., Physics and Mathematics, 1963, University of Iowa
M.S., Astronomy, 1965, University of Iowa
Ph.D., Physics, 1967, University of Iowa
Publications

Go to bibliography
Research Interests:
As a college student in Iowa, I was attracted to science and research by James Van Allen's space science program in the physics and astronomy department. Since then, it only took me a decade or so to realize that the most exciting planetary research involves trying to understand the climate change on earth that will result from anthropogenic changes of the atmospheric composition.

One of my research interests is radiative transfer in planetary atmospheres, especially interpreting remote sounding of the earth's atmosphere and surface from satellites. Such data, appropriately analyzed, may provide one of our most effective ways to monitor and study global change on the earth. The hardest part is trying to influence the nature of the measurements obtained, so that the key information can be obtained.

I am also interested in the development and application of global numerical models for the purpose of understanding current climate trends and projecting humans' potential impacts on climate. The scientific excitement in comparing theory with data, and developing some understanding of global changes that are occurring, is what makes all the other stuff worth it.

He's in it for the money, you idiot.

NASA Scientist Accused Of Using Celeb Status Among Environmental Groups To Enrich Himself | Fox News

 

[SAT]

So an accusation that he's in it for the money is proof?

You do realize that denying climate change is quite lucrative, right?

 

[westwall]

What strawman?

So, who's clone are you?

 

[daveman]

So an accusation that he's in it for the money is proof?

You do realize that denying climate change is quite lucrative, right?

There is far more money in supporting the cult.

Funny how you cultists screech "Follow the money!!" -- but ignore your fellow cultists' motives.

 

[westwall]

So an accusation that he's in it for the money is proof?

You do realize that denying climate change is quite lucrative, right?

Really? Where can I get some of this lucrative payout? Every sceptic I know is a working stiff. The leaders of the warmista's though are milionaires many times over with yours and mine tax dollars.

Dr. Tim Ball has been sued by Mann (who is getting TONS of money for his assault) and Dr. Ball is relying on donations to support his defence. Mann is worried now, his science is going to get an airing in court and he is going to lose his ass.

Whatcha gonna do then clone?

 

[Si modo]

You did, post 181.

No, I did not.

What is confusing you about what I said in 181?

 

[wirebender]

So an accusation that he's in it for the money is proof?

You do realize that denying climate change is quite lucrative, right?

Considering that AGW nuts are funded at a rate of 20,000 to 1 when compared to skeptics, you have walked out on a limb there that simply can't support you. Keep up the good work. Its entertaining as hell.