FairyTales of Global Warming..

[SSDD]

Louie Gohmert is my favorite comedian, that guy was born to do comedy.

I agree. Wonder why all Establ Repubs are deniers. Could it be they're in the pockets of Big Oil among other large monied interests?

"Big Oil" is the largest private enterprise investor in alternative energy research and development.

Don't confuse him with facts.

 

[SSDD]

Climate mafia? I have no idea what that means.

Then you are so uninformed that you really have nothing to say here...even the most diehard warmer wacko knows what is meant by that term. You really should try to learn at least something before trying to comment here.

 

[Crick]

Climate mafia? I have no idea what that means.

Don't let that bother you. The fellow you're talking to is so far out in left field he's coming back in from the right.

The conversation around here got nasty a long time ago. It's not you, its us. We've been a loggerheads for too long.

Welcome to the "conversation". We could use a new voice.

 

[skookerasbil]

so then you must have some plausible theories about how this world wide conspiracy works.

tell us what the result of the corruption of the peer review process does for the climate mafia? Then also tell us how the corruption of the peer review process doesn't have catastrophic effects on how the general public views science in general.

climate mafia? I have no idea what that means.

yikes



Here you go bro....good place to get a baseline >>> http://green-agenda.com/

 

[Kosh]

According to NASA's published data:

•The hottest year on record is 1934, not 1998.

•The third hottest year on record was 1921, not 2006.

•Three of the five hottest years on record occurred before 1940.

•Six of the top 10 hottest years occurred before 90 percent of the growth in greenhouse gas emissions during the last century occurred.

 

[Discombobulated]

Climate mafia? I have no idea what that means.

Then you are so uninformed that you really have nothing to say here...even the most diehard warmer wacko knows what is meant by that term. You really should try to learn at least something before trying to comment here.

I'm sure we're all much better informed with your superficial anecdotes of science.

 

[Kosh]

Climate mafia? I have no idea what that means.

Then you are so uninformed that you really have nothing to say here...even the most diehard warmer wacko knows what is meant by that term. You really should try to learn at least something before trying to comment here.

I'm sure we're all much better informed with your superficial anecdotes of science.

The AGW cult has yet to prove that they are informed about anything, but just programmed drones to post the same non science over and over again.

I have dared them all to defy their programming, but they act as if they will be killed by doing so..

 

[Discombobulated]

Then you are so uninformed that you really have nothing to say here...even the most diehard warmer wacko knows what is meant by that term. You really should try to learn at least something before trying to comment here.

I'm sure we're all much better informed with your superficial anecdotes of science.

The AGW cult has yet to prove that they are informed about anything, but just programmed drones to post the same non science over and over again.

I have dared them all to defy their programming, but they act as if they will be killed by doing so..

They seem to think that uninformed opinions about science are somehow relevant.

 

[SSDD]

Climate mafia? I have no idea what that means.

Don't let that bother you. The fellow you're talking to is so far out in left field he's coming back in from the right.

The conversation around here got nasty a long time ago. It's not you, its us. We've been a loggerheads for too long.

Welcome to the "conversation". We could use a new voice.

talking to yourself in public?

 

[SSDD]

I'm sure we're all much better informed with your superficial anecdotes of science.

The AGW cult has yet to prove that they are informed about anything, but just programmed drones to post the same non science over and over again.

I have dared them all to defy their programming, but they act as if they will be killed by doing so..

They seem to think that uninformed opinions about science are somehow relevant.

You like facts? You think you have facts? Lets see some factual evidence, supported by observation and repeatable experiment that proves that an increase of atmospheric CO2 in the amount of X will result in an increase of the global temperature by Y. You might also provide a factual quantification of the so called greenhouse effect. While you are at it, how about telling us what the earth's albedo is. If you have facts, backed by observed data, that proves that CO2 drives the climate, lets see it. Your warmer brethren rely entirely on the output of failed climate models....what do you have?

 

[Kosh]

I'm sure we're all much better informed with your superficial anecdotes of science.

The AGW cult has yet to prove that they are informed about anything, but just programmed drones to post the same non science over and over again.

I have dared them all to defy their programming, but they act as if they will be killed by doing so..

They seem to think that uninformed opinions about science are somehow relevant.

The AGW cult seems to think that their religion is somehow relevant over actual science.

May because this how the AGW cult is funded?

 

[Discombobulated]

The AGW cult has yet to prove that they are informed about anything, but just programmed drones to post the same non science over and over again.

I have dared them all to defy their programming, but they act as if they will be killed by doing so..

They seem to think that uninformed opinions about science are somehow relevant.

You like facts? You think you have facts? Lets see some factual evidence, supported by observation and repeatable experiment that proves that an increase of atmospheric CO2 in the amount of X will result in an increase of the global temperature by Y. You might also provide a factual quantification of the so called greenhouse effect. While you are at it, how about telling us what the earth's albedo is. If you have facts, backed by observed data, that proves that CO2 drives the climate, lets see it. Your warmer brethren rely entirely on the output of failed climate models....what do you have?

You've evidently failed to grasp my point here.....so I'll put it in plain language for you.
Since there are obviously no scientists on this thread, opinions don't matter. Because they are just that, opinions. Uniformed opinions of science are completely irrelevant, they are nothing more than superficial anecdotes without context.

 

[flacaltenn]

Amazing how many self proclaimed experts there are out there these days. Good thing we have people like that to validate and confirm actual science.

Ya mean like when the Prez gets up in front of the cameras and lies his ass off with a statement to the effect of " and the warming is accelerating at a rate that even the models didn't predict".. You mean "REAL SCIENTISTS need to check shit like that?

Or govt agencies start telling you that current weather events are due to Global Warming and hurricanes/tornadoes/snow/drought are ALL caused by 0.5degC rise in you lifetime? Or when even NBC and CBS start fabricating FICTIONAL tales of Global Warming like the topic of this thread?

You're gonna need a trainload of scientists to wrestle down all those whoppers..

OR --- you could do it yourself -- assuming you're not lazy..
Welcome to USMB -- BTW...

How would another self proclaimed expert even begin to know the difference between actual science and a whopper? Was it vetted by the fair and balanced folks at FOX News or what?

The contentions involved are not difficult. Perhaps you could handle them.. It's all about a 0.5degC increase in average annual Global Surface Temperature. Did the Prez lie? Did NBC lie to you as per the topic of this thread? If so -- WHY are they doing that?

Suit up and stop playing the clueless victim.. If they are lying to you about THIS? What else are you willing to defer to the "experts".. BTW --- some of us do have credentials in science, math, and engineering and have invested a LOT of time and effort to understand the arguments..

 

[flacaltenn]

Louie Gohmert is my favorite comedian, that guy was born to do comedy.

I agree. Wonder why all Establ Repubs are deniers. Could it be they're in the pockets of Big Oil among other large monied interests?

Exactly what their little conspiracy theories are designed to preempt..... the obvious fact that the other 3% of climate scientists are nothing more than shills paid by multi national corporations.

Not true at all.. There IS NO 97% consensus on the DETAILS of Global Warming. The proper questions were never asked in those 97% "polls".. Some of them were not even polls but surveys of scientific literature for "opinions".. And science papers are a bad place to try and find opinions in the first place.. Ask what the temperature anomaly WILL BE in 2060 and THAT would be a decisive quanititative scientific question. Don't ask if the world is warming -- because 97% of skeptics would agree to that.

The consensus you're relying on for your opinion never really existed. It was manufactured by political referendum.. The idea that every scientist in a prestigious society supports the statements made for political points in the front office is ludicrous. And doesn't matter a wit to the scientific process..

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

AUSTRALIA’S peak body of earth scientists has declared itself unable to publish a position statement on climate change due to the deep divisions within its membership on the issue.

After more than five years of debate and two false starts, Geological Society of Australia president Laurie Hutton said a statement on climate change was too difficult to achieve.

Mr Hutton said the issue “had the potential to be too divisive and would not serve the best interests of the society as a whole.”

The backdown, published in the GSA quarterly newsletter, is the culmination of two rejected position statements and years of furious correspondence among members. Some members believe the failure to make a strong statement on climate change is an embarrassment that puts Australian earth scientists at odds with their international peers.

It undermines the often cited stance that there is near unanimity among climate scientists on the issue.

GSA represents more than 2000 Australian earth scientists from academe, industry, government and research organisations.

The professionals are getting tired of the media/political sideshow. And that quote I gave you is proof at how fragile this propaganda campaign really is. That and the lie that NBC FABRICATED in order to please and curry favor with the current Admin in D.C.

 

[Discombobulated]

Ya mean like when the Prez gets up in front of the cameras and lies his ass off with a statement to the effect of " and the warming is accelerating at a rate that even the models didn't predict".. You mean "REAL SCIENTISTS need to check shit like that?

Or govt agencies start telling you that current weather events are due to Global Warming and hurricanes/tornadoes/snow/drought are ALL caused by 0.5degC rise in you lifetime? Or when even NBC and CBS start fabricating FICTIONAL tales of Global Warming like the topic of this thread?

You're gonna need a trainload of scientists to wrestle down all those whoppers..

OR --- you could do it yourself -- assuming you're not lazy..
Welcome to USMB -- BTW...

How would another self proclaimed expert even begin to know the difference between actual science and a whopper? Was it vetted by the fair and balanced folks at FOX News or what?

The contentions involved are not difficult. Perhaps you could handle them.. It's all about a 0.5degC increase in average annual Global Surface Temperature. Did the Prez lie? Did NBC lie to you as per the topic of this thread? If so -- WHY are they doing that?

Suit up and stop playing the clueless victim.. If they are lying to you about THIS? What else are you willing to defer to the "experts".. BTW --- some of us do have credentials in science, math, and engineering and have invested a LOT of time and effort to understand the arguments..

Time wasted....as you are clearly unqualified to put the information into an actual context.

 

[westwall]

How would another self proclaimed expert even begin to know the difference between actual science and a whopper? Was it vetted by the fair and balanced folks at FOX News or what?

The contentions involved are not difficult. Perhaps you could handle them.. It's all about a 0.5degC increase in average annual Global Surface Temperature. Did the Prez lie? Did NBC lie to you as per the topic of this thread? If so -- WHY are they doing that?

Suit up and stop playing the clueless victim.. If they are lying to you about THIS? What else are you willing to defer to the "experts".. BTW --- some of us do have credentials in science, math, and engineering and have invested a LOT of time and effort to understand the arguments..

Time wasted....as you are clearly unqualified to put the information into an actual context.

Your responses have descended to the level of "I know you are but what am I?" I suggest you start taking a meaningful part in the discussion or you will be placed on the pile of discarded sock puppets.

Your responses constitute no more than SPAM and that is not tolerated.

 

[Discombobulated]

The contentions involved are not difficult. Perhaps you could handle them.. It's all about a 0.5degC increase in average annual Global Surface Temperature. Did the Prez lie? Did NBC lie to you as per the topic of this thread? If so -- WHY are they doing that?

Suit up and stop playing the clueless victim.. If they are lying to you about THIS? What else are you willing to defer to the "experts".. BTW --- some of us do have credentials in science, math, and engineering and have invested a LOT of time and effort to understand the arguments..

Time wasted....as you are clearly unqualified to put the information into an actual context.

Your responses have descended to the level of "I know you are but what am I?" I suggest you start taking a meaningful part in the discussion or you will be placed on the pile of discarded sock puppets.

Your responses constitute no more than SPAM and that is not tolerated.

You still don't get it, you are not a climate scientist. Therefore your best guesses on this subject amount to nothing more than opinions and superficial anecdotes.

 

[flacaltenn]

How would another self proclaimed expert even begin to know the difference between actual science and a whopper? Was it vetted by the fair and balanced folks at FOX News or what?

The contentions involved are not difficult. Perhaps you could handle them.. It's all about a 0.5degC increase in average annual Global Surface Temperature. Did the Prez lie? Did NBC lie to you as per the topic of this thread? If so -- WHY are they doing that?

Suit up and stop playing the clueless victim.. If they are lying to you about THIS? What else are you willing to defer to the "experts".. BTW --- some of us do have credentials in science, math, and engineering and have invested a LOT of time and effort to understand the arguments..

Time wasted....as you are clearly unqualified to put the information into an actual context.

Time was wasted because I asked you a series of questions that you insisted on ignoring..
Why is that?

 

[Kosh]

The contentions involved are not difficult. Perhaps you could handle them.. It's all about a 0.5degC increase in average annual Global Surface Temperature. Did the Prez lie? Did NBC lie to you as per the topic of this thread? If so -- WHY are they doing that?

Suit up and stop playing the clueless victim.. If they are lying to you about THIS? What else are you willing to defer to the "experts".. BTW --- some of us do have credentials in science, math, and engineering and have invested a LOT of time and effort to understand the arguments..

Time wasted....as you are clearly unqualified to put the information into an actual context.

Time was wasted because I asked you a series of questions that you insisted on ignoring..
Why is that?

They are a far left Obama drone AGW cult member. That is why.

 

[flacaltenn]

Time wasted....as you are clearly unqualified to put the information into an actual context.

Your responses have descended to the level of "I know you are but what am I?" I suggest you start taking a meaningful part in the discussion or you will be placed on the pile of discarded sock puppets.

Your responses constitute no more than SPAM and that is not tolerated.

You still don't get it, you are not a climate scientist. Therefore your best guesses on this subject amount to nothing more than opinions and superficial anecdotes.

Westwall just gave you a CLEAR example of monkey wrenching the scientific publishing process and I gave you the scenario of what happens to your flimsy "consensus" of the "science being settled" when 2000 Australian climate scientists get personally involved in writing their society's Public Statement on Global Warming. There is no settled science behind the curtains. And no consensus on the temperature anomaly that will exist in 2040.

BTW -- I'm not a International Affairs scholar either, but the way we run this country, it MATTERS what the citizens think about bombing Syria or goin back into Iraq. You KNOW which countries leave those decisions "to the experts"... -- Right?