Global Warming Actually Still Accelerating - no "lull"

[orogenicman]

But of course you aren't winning, and you know you aren't winning.

Remind me, when Kyoto was ratified by the US Senate, what were the vote totals?

Not sure which dark place your head is in, but the science part is over. The investors and engineers and doers have left the starting gate since Bush was set aside. Your lips are flapping but nobody's listening except the other educationally deficient, but nobody is listening to them either. That's what irrelevant feels like.

but the science part is over.

That's what the warmists keep saying. If that were truly the case, why do they need to cheat, lie and keep opponents from getting published?

If they had anything original or valid to publish, they wouldn't have a problem getting it published.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not sure which dark place your head is in, but the science part is over. The investors and engineers and doers have left the starting gate since Bush was set aside. Your lips are flapping but nobody's listening except the other educationally deficient, but nobody is listening to them either. That's what irrelevant feels like.

but the science part is over.

That's what the warmists keep saying. If that were truly the case, why do they need to cheat, lie and keep opponents from getting published?

If they had anything original or valid to publish, they wouldn't have a problem getting it published.

So why the push to stop their publication?
If you were winning, you wouldn't have to cheat.

 

[orogenicman]

but the science part is over.

That's what the warmists keep saying. If that were truly the case, why do they need to cheat, lie and keep opponents from getting published?

If they had anything original or valid to publish, they wouldn't have a problem getting it published.

So why the push to stop their publication?
If you were winning, you wouldn't have to cheat.

If you had anything valid to publish, it would be published. And speaking of cheating, you really should read more about the people who are pushing the denial agenda. Instead of offering a valid alternative theory that better explains the data, you denialists expend all your energy and money and miniscule talents on trying to refute the currently prevailing theory, and getting the mostly uninformed public to believe in nonsense (which is not a big accomplishment, by the way). Talk about cheating!

Scientific theories stand or fall on their own merits. It isn't enough to simply blast away at a theory you don't like, particularly when you are not offering any original data to back up your claims, nor offering an alternative that better explains the available data. And that's largely why most scientists lump your rants into the category of pseudoscience.

 

[Oddball]

If they had anything original or valid to publish, they wouldn't have a problem getting it published.

So why the push to stop their publication?
If you were winning, you wouldn't have to cheat.

If you had anything valid to publish, it would be published.

"Valid", as determined by whom?...Oh yeah, the warmerist hoaxers, that who.

And speaking of cheating, you really should read more about the people who are pushing the denial agenda. Instead of offering a valid alternative theory that better explains the data, you denialists expend all your energy and money and miniscule talents on trying to refute the currently prevailing theory, and getting the mostly uninformed public to believe in nonsense (which is not a big accomplishment, by the way). Talk about cheating!

Talk about your stream of substanceless and invalid ad hominem attacks!

Scientific theories stand or fall on their own merits. It isn't enough to simply blast away at a theory you don't like, particularly when you are not offering any original data to back up your claims, nor offering an alternative that better explains the available data. And that's largely why most scientists lump your rants into the category of pseudoscience.

Wow...Project much?

BTW, almost all the original data that allegedly back up the claims of the warmerist hoaxers has been destroyed or "lost"...You really need to keep up with current events better.

 

[orogenicman]

So why the push to stop their publication?
If you were winning, you wouldn't have to cheat.

"Valid", as determined by whom?...Oh yeah, the warmerist hoaxers, that who.

All scientific papers are judged by peers in the field in which it was intended, because they are the best qualified to do so. Would you expect an entomologist to peer review a paper submitted by a brain surgeon? Really?

BTW, almost all the original data that allegedly back up the claims of the warmerist hoaxers has been destroyed or "lost"...You really need to keep up with current events better.

And there we have it - the liars and cheats reveal themselves. ALL of the data is readily available to anyone who needs it. You want global temperature measurements for the past fifty years? Contact every weather station on the planet and compile your own database. Most of it is readily available on the internet, in fact, just like this:

National Weather Service Climate

Have at it, dude.

 

[PMZ]

I don't have a lot of experience with irrelevant causes but I'd say that this one is on script. In fact it's the same script that all republican politics follows.

When you have nothing to offer, claim the competition has even less.

The script of losers everywhere.

I guess everyone has to work with what they have and those with nothing to offer can't offer anything.

 

[Oddball]

"Valid", as determined by whom?...Oh yeah, the warmerist hoaxers, that who.

All scientific papers are judged by peers in the field in which it was intended, because they are the best qualified to do so. Would you expect an entomologist to peer review a paper submitted by a brain surgeon? Really?

You misspelled "pal review".

BTW, almost all the original data that allegedly back up the claims of the warmerist hoaxers has been destroyed or "lost"...You really need to keep up with current events better.

And there we have it - the liars and cheats reveal themselves. ALL of the data is readily available to anyone who needs it. You want global temperature measurements for the past fifty years? Contact every weather station on the planet and compile your own database. Most of it is readily available on the internet, in fact, just like this:

National Weather Service Climate

Have at it, dude.

The Dog Ate Global Warming by Patrick J. Michaels | Climate Realists

Have at it, comrade.

 

[orogenicman]

All scientific papers are judged by peers in the field in which it was intended, because they are the best qualified to do so. Would you expect an entomologist to peer review a paper submitted by a brain surgeon? Really?

You misspelled "pal review".

And there we have it - the liars and cheats reveal themselves. ALL of the data is readily available to anyone who needs it. You want global temperature measurements for the past fifty years? Contact every weather station on the planet and compile your own database. Most of it is readily available on the internet, in fact, just like this:

National Weather Service Climate

Michaels has a more-than-20-year record of predictions regarding climate that have turned out to be wrong. Do you want a list?

Seriously, the man works for the CATO Institute. Enough said.
Have at it, dude.

The Dog Ate Global Warming by Patrick J. Michaels | Climate Realists

Have at it, comrade.

 

[orogenicman]

Michaels has a more-than-20-year record of predictions regarding climate that have turned out to be wrong. Do you want a list?

Patrick J. Michaels - SourceWatch

Michaels' firm does not disclose who its clients are, but leaked documents have revealed that several were power utilities which operate coal power stations. On a 2007 academic CV, Michaels disclosed that prior to creating his firm he had received funding from the Edison Electric Institute and the Western Fuels Association. He has also been a frequent speaker with leading coal and energy companies as well as coal and other industry lobby groups.[4]

Michaels is also associated with a number of think tanks and advocacy groups which dispute global warming. He is a Visiting Scientist with the George C. Marshall Institute, a Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies with the Cato Institute[5] and a member of the Advisory Board of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow.[6]

Michaels is also a Scientific Advisor of the American Council on Science and Health[7].

Michaels was a "supporter" of The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition, an industry-funded PR front group created in 1993 and run by the APCO Worldwide public relations firm. It worked to hang the label of "junk science" on environmentalists. The group is now defunct.[8]

Between December 1998[9] and September 2001[10] he was listed as a "Scientific Advisor" to the Greening Earth Society, a group that was funded and controlled by the Western Fuels Association (WFA), an association of coal-burning utility companies. WFA founded the group in 1997, according to an archived version of its website, "as a vehicle for advocacy on climate change, the environmental impact of CO2, and fossil fuel use."[11]

 

[Oddball]

Michaels has a more-than-20-year record of predictions regarding climate that have turned out to be wrong. Do you want a list?

Irrelevant ad hominem.....There are literally hundreds of pieces on the 'net reporting on the same topic....I only picked one.

Debunk what he, along with countless others, reported, about the original (read: ORIGINAL) research on so-called "climate change" being destroyed or "lost".

Fucking bring it.

 

[orogenicman]

Michaels has a more-than-20-year record of predictions regarding climate that have turned out to be wrong. Do you want a list?

Irrelevant ad hominem.....There are literally hundreds of pieces on the 'net reporting on the same topic....I only picked one.

Debunk what he, along with countless others, reported, about the original (read: ORIGINAL) research on so-called "climate change" being destroyed or "lost".

Fucking bring it.

More than relevant, as is his affiliations with the fossil fuel industry and right wing organizations promoting their anti-science agenda.

 

[flacaltenn]

Michaels has a more-than-20-year record of predictions regarding climate that have turned out to be wrong. Do you want a list?

Irrelevant ad hominem.....There are literally hundreds of pieces on the 'net reporting on the same topic....I only picked one.

Debunk what he, along with countless others, reported, about the original (read: ORIGINAL) research on so-called "climate change" being destroyed or "lost".

Fucking bring it.

More than relevant, as is his affiliations with the fossil fuel industry and right wing organizations promoting their anti-science agenda.

So lemme get this straight.. All I gots to do is to find a link between a contributor to the debate and a cause I don't like --- and I can discredit them and IGNORE their assertions?

Right... The companies that keep this economy running are "anti-science".. Every single fucking one of them.. Whereas folks who believe that Unicorns will wisper energy secrets into their ears and WILL IT TO HAPPEN --- are "pro-science"....

 

[orogenicman]

Irrelevant ad hominem.....There are literally hundreds of pieces on the 'net reporting on the same topic....I only picked one.

Debunk what he, along with countless others, reported, about the original (read: ORIGINAL) research on so-called "climate change" being destroyed or "lost".

Fucking bring it.

More than relevant, as is his affiliations with the fossil fuel industry and right wing organizations promoting their anti-science agenda.

So lemme get this straight.. All I gots to do is to find a link between a contributor to the debate and a cause I don't like --- and I can discredit them and IGNORE their assertions?

Right... The companies that keep this economy running are "anti-science".. Every single fucking one of them.. Whereas folks who believe that Unicorns will wisper energy secrets into their ears and WILL IT TO HAPPEN --- are "pro-science"....

If by contributing, you mean promoting lies and disinformation to what is not actually a debate, then yeah, you have my permission to ignore all the deniers, including yourself.

 

[flacaltenn]

More than relevant, as is his affiliations with the fossil fuel industry and right wing organizations promoting their anti-science agenda.

So lemme get this straight.. All I gots to do is to find a link between a contributor to the debate and a cause I don't like --- and I can discredit them and IGNORE their assertions?

Right... The companies that keep this economy running are "anti-science".. Every single fucking one of them.. Whereas folks who believe that Unicorns will wisper energy secrets into their ears and WILL IT TO HAPPEN --- are "pro-science"....

If by contributing, you mean promoting lies and disinformation to what is not actually a debate, then yeah, you have my permission to ignore all the deniers, including yourself.

If trying to keep the lights on in an advanced society is a crime.. Then sign me up dude. We are wasting too much money on windmills and other fantasies. Money that COULD BE used for real enviro protection...

 

[orogenicman]

So lemme get this straight.. All I gots to do is to find a link between a contributor to the debate and a cause I don't like --- and I can discredit them and IGNORE their assertions?

Right... The companies that keep this economy running are "anti-science".. Every single fucking one of them.. Whereas folks who believe that Unicorns will wisper energy secrets into their ears and WILL IT TO HAPPEN --- are "pro-science"....

If by contributing, you mean promoting lies and disinformation to what is not actually a debate, then yeah, you have my permission to ignore all the deniers, including yourself.

If trying to keep the lights on in an advanced society is a crime.. Then sign me up dude. We are wasting too much money on windmills and other fantasies. Money that COULD BE used for real enviro protection...

If posting strawman arguments is your idea of a scientific debate, you've got more serious problems than you are letting on.

 

[PMZ]

Republicans run from problems for the simple reason that they don't have solutions. AGW is merely one of a long list of problems that they have to sell as nonexistent because if they admitted to them they'd have to confront them. That requires people skilled at governance and their cupboard is bare. Has been for quite a while.

While they limp along with only their blind followers still believing they are the very definition of irrelevant.

Let them go. They will be replaced by something meaningful once they all get the message that we didn't fall for their BS.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Republicans run from problems for the simple reason that they don't have solutions. AGW is merely one of a long list of problems that they have to sell as nonexistent because if they admitted to them they'd have to confront them. That requires people skilled at governance and their cupboard is bare. Has been for quite a while.

While they limp along with only their blind followers still believing they are the very definition of irrelevant.

Let them go. They will be replaced by something meaningful once they all get the message that we didn't fall for their BS.

Republicans run from problems for the simple reason that they don't have solutions.

We have a solution.
We must spend $80 trillion so that the temperature in 2080 is 0.2 degrees lower.

 

[orogenicman]

Republicans run from problems for the simple reason that they don't have solutions. AGW is merely one of a long list of problems that they have to sell as nonexistent because if they admitted to them they'd have to confront them. That requires people skilled at governance and their cupboard is bare. Has been for quite a while.

While they limp along with only their blind followers still believing they are the very definition of irrelevant.

Let them go. They will be replaced by something meaningful once they all get the message that we didn't fall for their BS.

Republicans run from problems for the simple reason that they don't have solutions.

We have a solution.
We must spend $80 trillion so that the temperature in 2080 is 0.2 degrees lower.

What price are you willing to pay to preserve this planet's biodiversity?

 

[PMZ]

So lemme get this straight.. All I gots to do is to find a link between a contributor to the debate and a cause I don't like --- and I can discredit them and IGNORE their assertions?

Right... The companies that keep this economy running are "anti-science".. Every single fucking one of them.. Whereas folks who believe that Unicorns will wisper energy secrets into their ears and WILL IT TO HAPPEN --- are "pro-science"....

If by contributing, you mean promoting lies and disinformation to what is not actually a debate, then yeah, you have my permission to ignore all the deniers, including yourself.

If trying to keep the lights on in an advanced society is a crime.. Then sign me up dude. We are wasting too much money on windmills and other fantasies. Money that COULD BE used for real enviro protection...

Wasting money is fueling power plants with obsolete and costly fuels, much less building more of them.

You don't have anything to worry about. Your "thoughts" have been considered and rejected. Irrelevant means off the hook. Join the whiners on stage and have at it. The theater is empty.

 

[PMZ]

Republicans run from problems for the simple reason that they don't have solutions. AGW is merely one of a long list of problems that they have to sell as nonexistent because if they admitted to them they'd have to confront them. That requires people skilled at governance and their cupboard is bare. Has been for quite a while.

While they limp along with only their blind followers still believing they are the very definition of irrelevant.

Let them go. They will be replaced by something meaningful once they all get the message that we didn't fall for their BS.

Republicans run from problems for the simple reason that they don't have solutions.

We have a solution.
We must spend $80 trillion so that the temperature in 2080 is 0.2 degrees lower.

We don't need to spend $80T so your solution is bogus. Or does that include recovery from extreme weather, relocation of cities away from rising seas and farms to where the rain is?