Geologists On Global Climate Change

[Ernie S.]

I speak for me. You speak for yourself.

You have admitted that you lack knowledge and expertise on the subject. You vehemently express some very strong opinions for someone who is admittedly ignorant of the subject.

A subject on which neither you, nor anyone else on this forum, has ever demonstrated anything but Wikipedia level knowledge.

You are admittedly ignorant, so how the fuck would you know?

I don't have to be a genius to see how smart you are.

IQ=158.

The odds of your IQ being within 50 points of mine are very slim.

So then you have a high IQ but you're still completely full of shit; congratulations.

And what is your IQ? 37?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Now what real science did you introduce? The chart you present showed the earth cooling as the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere diminished. That is exactly what the scientists have been pointing out. That as GHGs diminish, the earth cools, as they increase, it warms. That is exactly what that chart shows. See the deep dip in the Ordivician? That represents a time when the Appalachians towered as high as the present Himalayas, and the weathering of the rock rapidly diminished the atmospheric CO2, creating a brief period of glaciation at that time.

You know full well that CO2 is NOT coupled with temperature and it does not drive it. You have been shown many times that CO2 rise LAGS warming by 200-800 years. We left the LIA some 200 years ago and all CO2 increase can be shown to correlate to it.

The Graph Kosh provided shows how CO2 lags the temp trend 100% of the time..

And you are totally full of shit.

Lets just see who is full of shit, shall we?

And Old Crock proves he is a lying shit head!

 

[Ernie S.]

And we're convinced of the opposite. The difference is, we have seen the emails that uncovered the conspiracy.

You're convinced of nothing. You can't even be honest about your own opinions.....which aren't even really yours.

So that would be a NO! You can not prove it..

So where's the evidence of global conspiracy? Haven't seen any yet? Must be because you guys are so full of shit all the time.

Of course you haven't seen it as you dismiss anything the AGW cult tells you to dismiss.

I dismiss silly shit from obese junkies on the AM radio, and the rantings of a fake British Lord, as well as that of an undegreed ex-TV weatherman. Present me with real evidence for your position.

But you fall hook line and sinker for a seminary dropout and former Vice President with no scientific credentials other that a claim to have invented the internet.

 

[Ernie S.]

So that would be a NO! You can not prove it..

So where's the evidence of global conspiracy? Haven't seen any yet? Must be because you guys are so full of shit all the time.

Of course you haven't seen it as you dismiss anything the AGW cult tells you to dismiss.

I dismiss silly shit from obese junkies on the AM radio, and the rantings of a fake British Lord, as well as that of an undegreed ex-TV weatherman. Present me with real evidence for your position.

You have yet to prove that CO2 "drives" climate and you demand proof from others? Now that is comedy!

Even James Hansen can not prove this, so your attempts just show what true tool to the AGW cult you are..

Once again, a whole shit pot full of unbacked assertations. Nothing but flap yap from an empty skull.

Hypocrisy! AGW is founded on unbacked "assertations". Computer models don't show what you want? Fudge data. Someone with actual credentials disputed your "science"? Exclude their work from your journal. Not sure you can garner support? Make wildly exaggerated claims of impending doom.

And you support your science with naught but ad homonym attacks on your adversaries.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ernie, baby, you are so full of it. You have yet to support your dimwitted bullshit with a single paper from a real scientist. I have posted links to scientific organizations and to peer reviewed scientific papers. And here is another from one of the best scientific organizations in the world, the USGS;

PRISM3D Global Warming Analysis Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program

PRISM3D: Global Warming Analysis
The PRISM3D reconstruction is a high-resolution, multi-faceted description of the mid Pliocene, which is the most recent warm period similar to what is expected in the coming century. The reconstruction has been used to ground-truth model simulations of mid-Pliocene climate and evaluate model capabilities to simulate climate conditions much different than today. PRISM3D is the most detailed global reconstruction of climate and environmental conditions older than the last glacial maximum (18-21 ka). It includes a new deep ocean temperature reconstruction, an expanded and refined sea surface temperature field, and revised and updated vegetation, topography, land ice and sea ice data sets. PRISM researchers collaborate with multiple modeling groups to explore Pliocene climate and improve our understanding of the climate system and possible future climate conditions. Future research will focus on regional climate dynamics with emphasis on processes, multiple environmental proxies, and a shorter time interval within the mid Pliocene.

Why is this research important?

Over the course of geologic history, global temperatures have changed in response to a multitude of climate forcings. Estimates of global warming during the mid-Piacenzian Age of the Pliocene Epoch (3.264 - 3.025 Ma) suggest that temperatures were up to 2°C greater than today. This level of warming is within the range of IPCC estimates of global temperature increases for the 21st century, and no other time period in the past three million years approaches this level of warming. Although scientists have identified the primary forcing mechanisms that contribute to global warming, there is uncertainty about the relative impact of each forcing and associated feedbacks. Reconstructions of SST and other paleoenvironmental parameters provide a synoptic view of the Earth during an interval considerably warmer than modern, enhancing abilities to model the response of the Earth system to episodes of warming.

 

[Muhammed]

Uncertainty?

AKA, bullshit!

 

[jc456]

Wow! This is huge. A bunch of guys who study rocks agree with the global warming hoax. Who is next, astrophysicists? Cryptozoologists? ISIS?

I'd love for someone to explain exactly how this global conspiracy of scientists and governments actually works. The deniers always seem to be a short on details like that.

it seems when push comes to shove, you have no evidence to support your claim. What's up with that?

What claim is that? I don't make any claims, unlike you, professor, I don't claim to be able to understand the science or put it into any kind of context. We apparently have a number of people on this thread claiming they have special knowledge that enables them to interpret the data. Any time anyone on an internet forum makes a claim like that I assume they're lying.

I never claimed anything here. I merely request proof of claims from the warmers on here. You seem to follow those waters, so I made an assumption you were claiming that the earth is doomed by CO2 cause some greedy scientists said so. I just want their evidence. Call me funny that way, I don't just believe, I research and find out both sides. Right now, the side making the claim is losing because mother nature isn't producing the results the models claimed. What say you?

I say you have no idea what you're talking about.

Prove me wrong

 

[Muhammed]

Dr. Richard Alley, one of the foremost glaciaologists in the world;

Maybe Ricky should try giving a lecture when he's not freaking out on acid.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Ernie, baby, you are so full of it. You have yet to support your dimwitted bullshit with a single paper from a real scientist. I have posted links to scientific organizations and to peer reviewed scientific papers. And here is another from one of the best scientific organizations in the world, the USGS;

PRISM3D Global Warming Analysis Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program

PRISM3D: Global Warming Analysis
The PRISM3D reconstruction is a high-resolution, multi-faceted description of the mid Pliocene, which is the most recent warm period similar to what is expected in the coming century. The reconstruction has been used to ground-truth model simulations of mid-Pliocene climate and evaluate model capabilities to simulate climate conditions much different than today. PRISM3D is the most detailed global reconstruction of climate and environmental conditions older than the last glacial maximum (18-21 ka). It includes a new deep ocean temperature reconstruction, an expanded and refined sea surface temperature field, and revised and updated vegetation, topography, land ice and sea ice data sets. PRISM researchers collaborate with multiple modeling groups to explore Pliocene climate and improve our understanding of the climate system and possible future climate conditions. Future research will focus on regional climate dynamics with emphasis on processes, multiple environmental proxies, and a shorter time interval within the mid Pliocene.

Why is this research important?

Over the course of geologic history, global temperatures have changed in response to a multitude of climate forcings. Estimates of global warming during the mid-Piacenzian Age of the Pliocene Epoch (3.264 - 3.025 Ma) suggest that temperatures were up to 2°C greater than today. This level of warming is within the range of IPCC estimates of global temperature increases for the 21st century, and no other time period in the past three million years approaches this level of warming. Although scientists have identified the primary forcing mechanisms that contribute to global warming, there is uncertainty about the relative impact of each forcing and associated feedbacks. Reconstructions of SST and other paleoenvironmental parameters provide a synoptic view of the Earth during an interval considerably warmer than modern, enhancing abilities to model the response of the Earth system to episodes of warming.

Too Funny:
You cite a 3D model which fails 100% of the time outside of 36 hours... A model which fails in short time spans means it has huge error bars which become all encompassing as time increases showing the model useless.

Old Fraud really needs some basic analytical science training.

 

[jc456]

Can't comment on bogus research, huh?

I'm not a scientist, how would I know bogus research if I saw it?

Basically you are admitting that you are not intelligent enough to know the difference.

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

Hahahaha from you? You know shit but you are funny

 

[orogenicman]

Can't comment on bogus research, huh?

I'm not a scientist, how would I know bogus research if I saw it?

Basically you are admitting that you are not intelligent enough to know the difference.

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

Hahahaha from you? You know shit but you are funny

 

[Muhammed]

Can't comment on bogus research, huh?

I'm not a scientist, how would I know bogus research if I saw it?

Basically you are admitting that you are not intelligent enough to know the difference.

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

On your part, you have already admitted that you are ignorant regarding the subject.

On my part, we are talking about decades of research. I cannot totally educate you about everything from my extensive research in a USMB post.

There are these things called libraries. Visit one sometime.

 

[orogenicman]

Can't comment on bogus research, huh?

I'm not a scientist, how would I know bogus research if I saw it?

Basically you are admitting that you are not intelligent enough to know the difference.

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

On your part, you have already admitted that you are ignorant regarding the subject.

On my part, we are talking about decades of research. I cannot totally educate you about everything from my extensive research in a USMB post.

There are these things called libraries. Visit one sometime.

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

 

[Muhammed]

Can't comment on bogus research, huh?

I'm not a scientist, how would I know bogus research if I saw it?

Basically you are admitting that you are not intelligent enough to know the difference.

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

On your part, you have already admitted that you are ignorant regarding the subject.

On my part, we are talking about decades of research. I cannot totally educate you about everything from my extensive research in a USMB post.

There are these things called libraries. Visit one sometime.

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

Perhaps you cannot comprehend the difference between acedemics and scientists.

 

[orogenicman]

I'm not a scientist, how would I know bogus research if I saw it?

Basically you are admitting that you are not intelligent enough to know the difference.

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

On your part, you have already admitted that you are ignorant regarding the subject.

On my part, we are talking about decades of research. I cannot totally educate you about everything from my extensive research in a USMB post.

There are these things called libraries. Visit one sometime.

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

Perhaps you cannot comprehend the difference between acedemics and scientists.

I can tell the difference between someone who has actually done research, and a wannabe who makes a boast and then doesn't support it with facts.

 

[Muhammed]

Basically you are admitting that you are not intelligent enough to know the difference.

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

On your part, you have already admitted that you are ignorant regarding the subject.

On my part, we are talking about decades of research. I cannot totally educate you about everything from my extensive research in a USMB post.

There are these things called libraries. Visit one sometime.

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

Perhaps you cannot comprehend the difference between acedemics and scientists.

I can tell the difference between someone who has actually done research, and a wannabe who makes a boast and then doesn't support it with facts.

I challenge you to state the supposed "facts" that you are speaking of, and support them with evidence. And explain the relevance.

 

[orogenicman]

Feel free to demonstrate your incredible scientific expertise on this issue.

On your part, you have already admitted that you are ignorant regarding the subject.

On my part, we are talking about decades of research. I cannot totally educate you about everything from my extensive research in a USMB post.

There are these things called libraries. Visit one sometime.

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

Perhaps you cannot comprehend the difference between acedemics and scientists.

I can tell the difference between someone who has actually done research, and a wannabe who makes a boast and then doesn't support it with facts.

I challenge you to state the supposed "facts" that you are speaking of, and support them with evidence. And explain the relevance.

I have already challenged you to post links to your so-called "research", which you have yet to do.

 

[Muhammed]

On your part, you have already admitted that you are ignorant regarding the subject.

On my part, we are talking about decades of research. I cannot totally educate you about everything from my extensive research in a USMB post.

There are these things called libraries. Visit one sometime.

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

Perhaps you cannot comprehend the difference between acedemics and scientists.

I can tell the difference between someone who has actually done research, and a wannabe who makes a boast and then doesn't support it with facts.

I challenge you to state the supposed "facts" that you are speaking of, and support them with evidence. And explain the relevance.

I have already challenged you to post links to your so-called "research", which you have yet to do.

"Research" and "links" are not mutually inclusive, except in the minds of extremely stupid people.

 

[orogenicman]

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

Perhaps you cannot comprehend the difference between acedemics and scientists.

I can tell the difference between someone who has actually done research, and a wannabe who makes a boast and then doesn't support it with facts.

I challenge you to state the supposed "facts" that you are speaking of, and support them with evidence. And explain the relevance.

I have already challenged you to post links to your so-called "research", which you have yet to do.

"research" and "links" are not mutuaally inclucsive, except in the minds of extremely stupid people.

So what you are saying is that you lied when you claimed "On my part, we are talking about decades of research". What research, where?

 

[Dot Com]

Really? Perhaps you can provide us with links to these peer reviewed papers you've authored on the subject.

Perhaps you cannot comprehend the difference between acedemics and scientists.

I can tell the difference between someone who has actually done research, and a wannabe who makes a boast and then doesn't support it with facts.

I challenge you to state the supposed "facts" that you are speaking of, and support them with evidence. And explain the relevance.

I have already challenged you to post links to your so-called "research", which you have yet to do.

"Research" and "links" are not mutually inclusive, except in the minds of extremely stupid people.

so you have nothing. Thats all you had to say.