Climate Change Skeptics Eat Crow

[SAT]

We know the absorption bands for CO2 and CH4, as well as the other GHGs that we are creating. We have data from satellites that show less energy being emitted from the earth in those bands. Therefore, we are retaining the heat that would have otherwise been emitted.

We also know that the emission bands are the precise opposite of the absorption bands indicating that no energy is being trapped by so called greenhouse gasses. As to satellites showing that less energy is being emitted from the earth in those bands, I call bullshit. I have provided snapshots of those satellite data and they show no decrease in energy in those bands even though the concentration of so called GHG's has increased. The only thing that showed less energy as a result of so called GHG's was the models. Once again, you guys are accepting the output of models as actual data. That is the primary reason you can't be taken seriously.

‘The satellites show cooling’—No, they don’t | How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming | Grist

 

[RollingThunder]

LOL.

There is a consensus that evolution has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen on earth as long as there is life here.

But there are holes in the theory big enough to fly a C5A through.

LOLOLOLOL....ha!....figured you were an evolution denier too, wiredwrong. Your anti-science myths and misinformation about evolution are as ridiculous as your braindead myths about global warming. In this area as well, you have no idea what is going on.

There is a consensus that GHGs increase heat on the surface of the earth in accordance with the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere. There is a consensus that we are rapidly increasing the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere.

And yet, as those so called GHG's increase, there has been no warming for more than a decade now and it doesn't seem as if there is likely any coming. When the consensus view doesn't match the observed reality, the consensus view becomes highly suspect.

And here's your braindead myths about global warming, right on cue. Don't you ever get tired of lying your stupid ass off all the time, wiredwrong? All you ever do is endlessly regurgitate the same old, tired, long-since-debunked denier cult lies over and over again.

NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record According to Scientists in 48 Countries
Earth has been growing warmer for more than fifty years
United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
July 28, 2010
(government publication - free to reproduce)

The 2009 State of the Climate report released today draws on data for 10 key climate indicators that all point to the same finding: the scientific evidence that our world is warming is unmistakable. More than 300 scientists from 160 research groups in 48 countries contributed to the report, which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.

Based on comprehensive data from multiple sources, the report defines 10 measurable planet-wide features used to gauge global temperature changes. The relative movement of each of these indicators proves consistent with a warming world. Seven indicators are rising: air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, air temperature over oceans, sea level, ocean heat, humidity and tropospheric temperature in the “active-weather” layer of the atmosphere closest to the Earth’s surface. Three indicators are declining: Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern hemisphere.

“For the first time, and in a single compelling comparison, the analysis brings together multiple observational records from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the ocean,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “The records come from many institutions worldwide. They use data collected from diverse sources, including satellites, weather balloons, weather stations, ships, buoys and field surveys. These independently produced lines of evidence all point to the same conclusion: our planet is warming.”

Ten Indicators of a Warming World. (Credit: NOAA)

The report emphasizes that human society has developed for thousands of years under one climatic state, and now a new set of climatic conditions are taking shape. These conditions are consistently warmer, and some areas are likely to see more extreme events like severe drought, torrential rain and violent storms.

“Despite the variability caused by short-term changes, the analysis conducted for this report illustrates why we are so confident the world is warming,” said Peter Stott, Ph.D., contributor to the report and head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution of the United Kingdom Met Office Hadley Centre. “When we look at air temperature and other indicators of climate, we see highs and lows in the data from year to year because of natural variability. Understanding climate change requires looking at the longer-term record. When we follow decade-to-decade trends using multiple data sets and independent analyses from around the world, we see clear and unmistakable signs of a warming world.”

While year-to-year changes in temperature often reflect natural climatic variations such as El Niño/La Niña events, changes in average temperature from decade-to-decade reveal long-term trends such as global warming. Each of the last three decades has been much warmer than the decade before. At the time, the 1980s was the hottest decade on record. In the 1990s, every year was warmer than the average of the previous decade. The 2000s were warmer still.

“The temperature increase of one degree Fahrenheit over the past 50 years may seem small, but it has already altered our planet,” said Deke Arndt, co-editor of the report and chief of the Climate Monitoring Branch of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. “Glaciers and sea ice are melting, heavy rainfall is intensifying and heat waves are more common. And, as the new report tells us, there is now evidence that over 90 percent of warming over the past 50 years has gone into our ocean.”

More and more, Americans are witnessing the impacts of climate change in their own backyards, including sea-level rise, longer growing seasons, changes in river flows, increases in heavy downpours, earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons in our waters. People are searching for relevant and timely information about these changes to inform decision-making about virtually all aspects of their lives. To help keep citizens and businesses informed about climate, NOAA created the Climate Portal at NOAA Climate Services. The portal features a short video that summarizes some of the highlights of the State of the Climate Report.

State of the Climate is published as a special supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society and is edited by D.S. Arndt, M.O. Baringer, and M.R. Johnson. The full report and an online media packet with graphics is available online: BAMS Annual State of the Climate.

 

[del]

bolding just oozes credibility

nice job

 

[del]

bolding just oozes credibility

nice job

 

[westwall]

Previously I gave the kid a link to a summary of Popper's philosophy on the logic of it. I doubt he read it.

But, indeed the models are unfalsifiable - there exists no data set, either real or hypothetical - that falsifies the model.

The foremost litmus test on whether something is scientific is it must be falsifiable. That is the demarcation between science and pseudo-science.

Thus, the models are not scientific models.

Good luck with seeing if the poster grasps that.

I doubt it; he can't even grasp simple burden, etc..

I've allways admired Popper, reminds me of John Rawls in many ways. And I agree with you, but for a different reason, they don't care to know the truth, they could understand if they chose too. They choose not to.

Sadly, I think you have a point - it is willful ignorance. The odd thing is, they don't care if they look like morons. That's always puzzled me.

I'm very thankful to my research advisor while in grad school. While we were all overloaded with actual research work, he stressed the importance of the philosophy of science - old school guy. I hated it at the time - philosophy was one of the last things I wanted to study, for craps sake - but am thankful for it now. Because of Popper, the methodology in the sciences is as protected from human and other influences (ie. political) as is feasibly possible. This revolution started in the 30s and was complete within a year or two. The entire community adopted it with open arms.

Anyway, I wish these sorts of basics were required material in high school. How things would be different if more non-science folks knew this information (both 'sides', too). There should never be 'sides' in science.

Popper is rolling over in his grave.

Contrary to popular opinion, I don't care the outcome of this topic. If the science shows a significant influence of man made CO2, then so be it. But, give the actual science a chance. The only 'side' I am on is the side of science. The irony is, that makes many of us 'deniers' of science. (Only to the ignorant and/or dishonest, though.)

Very well said. I can do naught but agree with you. Science is suffering due to the unethical, corrupt behavior of a small group of climatologists. ALL of science suffers because of these quacks.

 

[SAT]

bolding just oozes credibility

nice job

Bolding factual information does more for a discussion than tired insults.

 

[westwall]

bolding just oozes credibility

nice job

Bolding factual information does more for a discussion than tired insults.

Explain the significance of a non-falsifiable hypothesis.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Warmists Now Claim Global Warming 'Worse than Predicted'?! Climate Depot Responds: 'The scientific case for man-made climate fears has collapsed' | Climate Depot

The Antarctic sea ice extent has been at or near record extent in the past few summers, the Arctic has rebounded in recent years since the low point in 2007, polarbearsare thriving, sea level is not showing acceleration and is actuallydropping, Cholera and Malaria are failing to follow global warming predictions, Mount Kilimanjaro melt fears are being made a mockery by gains in snow cover, global temperatures have been holding steady for a decade or more, deaths due to extreme weather are radically declining, global tropical cyclone activity is near historic lows, the frequency of major U.S. hurricanes has declined, the oceans are missing their predicted heat content, big tornados have dramatically declined since the 1970s, droughts are not historically unusual nor caused by mankind, there is no evidence we are currently having unusual weather, scandals continue to rock the climate fear movement, the UN IPCC has been exposed as being a hotbed of environmental activists and scientists continue to dissent at a rapid pace."

 

[SAT]

bolding just oozes credibility

nice job

Bolding factual information does more for a discussion than tired insults.

Explain the significance of a non-falsifiable hypothesis.

Here, this should help you.

Falsifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[westwall]

Bolding factual information does more for a discussion than tired insults.

Explain the significance of a non-falsifiable hypothesis.

Here, this should help you.

Falsifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No, I want you to explain it in your own words then apply it to the global warming hypothesis. Explain to us how global warming can be responsible for causing less snow to fall in winter and at the same time causing more snow to fall in winter.

Reference the unfalsifiability problem to more rain/less rain, bird migrations longer/bird migrations shorter, Earths rotation to slow down/Earths rotation to speed up, North Atlantic Cyclone activity to increase/North Atlantic Cyclone activity to decrease.

All of these mutually exclusive predictions, and many many more have been claimed by the AGW alarmist camp. Please explain how the problem of unfalsifiability affects these predictions. In your own words.

 

[SAT]

No, I want you to explain it in your own words then apply it to the global warming hypothesis. Explain to us how global warming can be responsible for causing less snow to fall in winter and at the same time causing more snow to fall in winter.

Reference the unfalsifiability problem to more rain/less rain, bird migrations longer/bird migrations shorter, Earths rotation to slow down/Earths rotation to speed up, North Atlantic Cyclone activity to increase/North Atlantic Cyclone activity to decrease.

All of these mutually exclusive predictions, and many many more have been claimed by the AGW alarmist camp. Please explain how the problem of unfalsifiability affects these predictions. In your own words.

You're not in a battle with me. You're in a battle with reality. Those always end with reality on top.

Global warming causes climate instability. I'm not sure where you're getting the accusations above, but what you're calling contradictions may be that you've heard varying predictions about the effects of climate change.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, I want you to explain it in your own words then apply it to the global warming hypothesis. Explain to us how global warming can be responsible for causing less snow to fall in winter and at the same time causing more snow to fall in winter.

Reference the unfalsifiability problem to more rain/less rain, bird migrations longer/bird migrations shorter, Earths rotation to slow down/Earths rotation to speed up, North Atlantic Cyclone activity to increase/North Atlantic Cyclone activity to decrease.

All of these mutually exclusive predictions, and many many more have been claimed by the AGW alarmist camp. Please explain how the problem of unfalsifiability affects these predictions. In your own words.

You're not in a battle with me. You're in a battle with reality. Those always end with reality on top.

Global warming causes climate instability. I'm not sure where you're getting the accusations above, but what you're calling contradictions may be that you've heard varying predictions about the effects of climate change.

Global warming causes climate instability.

It's true, without the Sun, our climate would be stable.

may be that you've heard varying predictions about the effects of climate change.

There's not a consensus?

 

[SAT]

State of Knowledge | Science | Climate Change | U.S. EPA

What's Known
What's Likely
What's Uncertain

Yes, there is a lot of uncertainty about where this all leads.

 

[Si modo]

Si, the Journal of Climatology is a research journal. You have to pay to read it online, they don't give it away for free.

Please don't let your anger blind you to this-I'm not asking that you agree with that POV. Just that such articles exist.

Let's get even simpler. Do you agree that there is such a publication as the Journal of Climatology?

LOL.

There is a consensus that evolution has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen on earth as long as there is life here.

There is a consensus that GHGs increase heat on the surface of the earth in accordance with the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere. There is a consensus that we are rapidly increasing the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere.

There is a consensus among those with a brain that Sis is a lying political troll. All that flap yap without a single referance to real science is just deflection from the fact that you cannot present a single bit of real science to support your political postitions.

What he said.

I've tried the simplest of questions, starting with "Is the Earth getting hotter?" That question was met with various expressions of fear, including Si sourly admitting that the Earth has gotten hotter over the last 130 years.

I tried to point out that there might be a reason that there's a correlation between package delivery and global warming. That was met with fear as well.

Now I can't even get Si to admit that there are research papers purporting to show evidence of AGW. She says if I can't post a link to them, they don't exist. She thinks reality is dependent on my posting a link.

Somehow I don't think Popper would be too proud of that. KWIM?

I understand some have to pay for the paper.

But, go ahead and provide the citation that you believe supports your claim that man made CO2 is the cause of any warming. I assure you I will be able to inspect the paper.

 

[SAT]

I understand some have to pay for the paper.

But, go ahead and provide the citation that you believe supports your claim that man made CO2 is the cause of any warming. I assure you I will be able to inspect the paper.

So you're in agreement that the Journal of Climatology exists.

Right?

 

[westwall]

No, I want you to explain it in your own words then apply it to the global warming hypothesis. Explain to us how global warming can be responsible for causing less snow to fall in winter and at the same time causing more snow to fall in winter.

Reference the unfalsifiability problem to more rain/less rain, bird migrations longer/bird migrations shorter, Earths rotation to slow down/Earths rotation to speed up, North Atlantic Cyclone activity to increase/North Atlantic Cyclone activity to decrease.

All of these mutually exclusive predictions, and many many more have been claimed by the AGW alarmist camp. Please explain how the problem of unfalsifiability affects these predictions. In your own words.

You're not in a battle with me. You're in a battle with reality. Those always end with reality on top.

Global warming causes climate instability. I'm not sure where you're getting the accusations above, but what you're calling contradictions may be that you've heard varying predictions about the effects of climate change.

How can climate instability cause mutually opposing conditions in the same geographic area. The accusations above are all peer reviewed papers put forth by the AGW cult.

Here is a short list for you with links to the papers....they are each one side of the same argument. Published by AGW supporters. This shows the unfalsifiable nature of AGW "theory".

Now, in your own words, tell us how we can explain these very problematic papers. And this is a very small number of what's out there. And you are correct, I'm not having a battle with you. You're having a battle with reality, and it's all of your own manufacture.


Amazon rainforests green-up with sunlight in dry season

Amazon forests did not green-up during the 2005 drought

Climate change and geomorphological hazards in the eastern European Alps

ingentaconnect Impact of a climate change on avalanche hazard

Effect of global warming on the length-of-day

Ocean bottom pressure changes lead to a decreasing length-of-day in a warming climate

 

[Si modo]

I understand some have to pay for the paper.

But, go ahead and provide the citation that you believe supports your claim that man made CO2 is the cause of any warming. I assure you I will be able to inspect the paper.

So you're in agreement that the Journal of Climatology exists.

Right?

 

[SAT]

No, I want you to explain it in your own words then apply it to the global warming hypothesis. Explain to us how global warming can be responsible for causing less snow to fall in winter and at the same time causing more snow to fall in winter.

Reference the unfalsifiability problem to more rain/less rain, bird migrations longer/bird migrations shorter, Earths rotation to slow down/Earths rotation to speed up, North Atlantic Cyclone activity to increase/North Atlantic Cyclone activity to decrease.

All of these mutually exclusive predictions, and many many more have been claimed by the AGW alarmist camp. Please explain how the problem of unfalsifiability affects these predictions. In your own words.

You're not in a battle with me. You're in a battle with reality. Those always end with reality on top.

Global warming causes climate instability. I'm not sure where you're getting the accusations above, but what you're calling contradictions may be that you've heard varying predictions about the effects of climate change.

How can climate instability cause mutually opposing conditions in the same geographic area. The accusations above are all peer reviewed papers put forth by the AGW cult.

Here is a short list for you with links to the papers....they are each one side of the same argument. Published by AGW supporters. This shows the unfalsifiable nature of AGW "theory".

Now, in your own words, tell us how we can explain these very problematic papers. And this is a very small number of what's out there. And you are correct, I'm not having a battle with you. You're having a battle with reality, and it's all of your own manufacture.


Amazon rainforests green-up with sunlight in dry season

Amazon forests did not green-up during the 2005 drought

Climate change and geomorphological hazards in the eastern European Alps

ingentaconnect Impact of a climate change on avalanche hazard

Effect of global warming on the length-of-day

Ocean bottom pressure changes lead to a decreasing length-of-day in a warming climate

If those articles read as you say, then it suggests that there's still debate within the scientific community about the effects-but not about the reality of AGW.

 

[Si modo]

You're not in a battle with me. You're in a battle with reality. Those always end with reality on top.

Global warming causes climate instability. I'm not sure where you're getting the accusations above, but what you're calling contradictions may be that you've heard varying predictions about the effects of climate change.

How can climate instability cause mutually opposing conditions in the same geographic area. The accusations above are all peer reviewed papers put forth by the AGW cult.

Here is a short list for you with links to the papers....they are each one side of the same argument. Published by AGW supporters. This shows the unfalsifiable nature of AGW "theory".

Now, in your own words, tell us how we can explain these very problematic papers. And this is a very small number of what's out there. And you are correct, I'm not having a battle with you. You're having a battle with reality, and it's all of your own manufacture.


Amazon rainforests green-up with sunlight in dry season

Amazon forests did not green-up during the 2005 drought

Climate change and geomorphological hazards in the eastern European Alps

ingentaconnect Impact of a climate change on avalanche hazard

Effect of global warming on the length-of-day

Ocean bottom pressure changes lead to a decreasing length-of-day in a warming climate

If those articles read as you say, then it suggests that there's still debate within the scientific community about the effects-but not about the reality of AGW.

I don't think you even realize how idiotic what you just said is.

What about the falsifiability? Do you see that inherent problem in all those links?

And, you should read those links. I doubt you read any of them. Seven minutes?

 

[SAT]

I understand some have to pay for the paper.

But, go ahead and provide the citation that you believe supports your claim that man made CO2 is the cause of any warming. I assure you I will be able to inspect the paper.

So you're in agreement that the Journal of Climatology exists.

Right?

Yes, that's what I said yesterday. WTF is this woman going on about. She won't even admit that papers exist purporting to show proof of AGW. She keeps saying if I can't give her a link to such papers, that my claims are false. And I said WTF? This woman is nuts, desperate, drunk, or possibly all three.

You do agree that there is such a publication, and that there are other such publications, right?