Enough is enough - use RICO to restore science respect.

[Billy_Bob]

Are you blindly religious too?
Like the word "truth", you throw around the term "proof" and think it sticks on a wall?

What "proof" was i alluding to?
What "proof" did Lewis have to support his belief?
.

Lol, do you have a point?

The scientific establishments of Russia, China and India are also skeptical of Climate Change bullshit.

The climate has ALWAYS changed, and there is no proof that it is driven mostly by carbon dioxide when there are many more green houses gases that are a far greater share of the atmosphere aside from CO2, doofus.

The point was that this scientist was blowing the whistle on all the Obamy federal funding going into 'research' in favor of Climate Change nonsense.

That is pretty much proven, and when the next Republican is elected he wont likely be a believer in your horse shit.

---
So, you avoided answering both my simple Q's because ... you can't?
Even a drunkard can see through your diversion! LOL.
Lewis must have been paid off by the rich denier orgs. Why else did he contradict his own climate change affirmation from his 1997 book .. without supplying data/research?

What did you not understand about this statement representing MANY (vs 1) physicists?

"On the matter of global climate change, APS notes that virtually all reputable scientists agree with the following observations:
Carbon dioxide is increasing in the atmosphere due to human activity;
Carbon dioxide is an excellent infrared absorber, and therefore, its increasing presence in the atmosphere contributes to global warming; and
The dwell time of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is hundreds of years.
On these matters, APS judges the science to be quite clear.”
.

Another appeal to authority and a political statement as fact.. Epic fail!

---
You don't reference authorities/experts to support your beliefs?
Ok then, why don't you provide your own evidence & logical analysis?
No can do?
LOL. Another lame debater!
.

You have yet to supply any facts showing the masses of those organizations actually believe it.. There are several organizations who now refuse to make any statement about CAGW as their membership is so divided on the issue. Your 97% consensus is a lie as is the use of political statements as proof..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Are you blindly religious too?
Like the word "truth", you throw around the term "proof" and think it sticks on a wall?

What "proof" was i alluding to?
What "proof" did Lewis have to support his belief?
.

Lol, do you have a point?

The scientific establishments of Russia, China and India are also skeptical of Climate Change bullshit.

The climate has ALWAYS changed, and there is no proof that it is driven mostly by carbon dioxide when there are many more green houses gases that are a far greater share of the atmosphere aside from CO2, doofus.

The point was that this scientist was blowing the whistle on all the Obamy federal funding going into 'research' in favor of Climate Change nonsense.

That is pretty much proven, and when the next Republican is elected he wont likely be a believer in your horse shit.

---
So, you avoided answering both my simple Q's because ... you can't?
Even a drunkard can see through your diversion! LOL.
Lewis must have been paid off by the rich denier orgs. Why else did he contradict his own climate change affirmation from his 1997 book .. without supplying data/research?

What did you not understand about this statement representing MANY (vs 1) physicists?

"On the matter of global climate change, APS notes that virtually all reputable scientists agree with the following observations:
Carbon dioxide is increasing in the atmosphere due to human activity;
Carbon dioxide is an excellent infrared absorber, and therefore, its increasing presence in the atmosphere contributes to global warming; and
The dwell time of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is hundreds of years.
On these matters, APS judges the science to be quite clear.”
.

Another appeal to authority and a political statement as fact.. Epic fail!

---
You don't reference authorities/experts to support your beliefs?
Ok then, why don't you provide your own evidence & logical analysis?
No can do?
LOL. Another lame debater!
.

Funny you should ask... I have posted this many times and not one of you left wit loons can answer even the most basic of questions..

Below are two rates of warming from the Hadcrut3 lower troposphere. One is from the period 1900 through 1950 and the the other is 1951 through 2000. Below each is the rate of warming.

The trend for the period 1900-1950 is 0.51 deg C or 0.103/decade

This trend occurred before CO2 became a rapidly increasing according to the IPCC and is near or is the Natural Variational rate.

The trend for 1951-2000 is 0.50 deg C or 0.100 deg C/decade.

This means that the two rates of warming are statistically insignificant DESPITE the rapid rise in CO2 and equal to NATURAL VARIATION..

So by simple observation we can see the problem with the hypothesis of runaway temp caused by CO2. During the time they claim runway rise it was nothing of the sort and even given the rise in CO2 there was no discernible increase in that natural rise.


Now lets play on the last 18 years 8 months where there has been no warming yet CO2 has risen 24ppm.

There is no coupling of water vapor to CO2. Empirical evidence says it does not exist. Even CO2 is not acting as it does in the lab while inside of our atmosphere. Were only seeing about 45% of what we see in the lab for temp rise with just CO2 alone in the atmosphere.

CO2 isn't driving anything by empirical evidence.. What warming we are seeing can be attributed to ocean circulations change and natural variation..

Now show me how CO2 is a problem?