Global Warming in a Few Slides

[westwall]

The bottom line:

the climate of the earth is changing, it has been changing for millions of years and will be changing millions of years from now.

Man has never had anything to do with it and never will.

AGW is a lie. Algore is a fraud. Obama is a liar.

Of course.

Unless you consider the actual facts of the situation.

Then educate us. Show us some measurable facts that support your assertion.

 

[RDD_1210]

The bottom line:

the climate of the earth is changing, it has been changing for millions of years and will be changing millions of years from now.

Man has never had anything to do with it and never will.

AGW is a lie. Algore is a fraud. Obama is a liar.

Of course.

Unless you consider the actual facts of the situation.

Then educate us. Show us some measurable facts that support your assertion.

Before I do this again, tell me who you consider to be a legitimate expert on the subject.

 

[RDD_1210]

Massive decrease in Greenland ice over the past 50 years

Do you know why it's called GREENLAND? Hint, not because it was covered in ice.

But it is covered with ice. So what's your point exactly?

 

[westwall]

Of course.

Unless you consider the actual facts of the situation.

Then educate us. Show us some measurable facts that support your assertion.

Before I do this again, tell me who you consider to be a legitimate expert on the subject.

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Then educate us. Show us some measurable facts that support your assertion.

Before I do this again, tell me who you consider to be a legitimate expert on the subject.

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

Hand written notes?

 

[RDD_1210]

Then educate us. Show us some measurable facts that support your assertion.

Before I do this again, tell me who you consider to be a legitimate expert on the subject.

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

 

[ScienceRocks]

I support strengthen levies and infrastructure for cities like New Orleans, New York and Miami to deal with a climate charge. I think this is a good idea even if this is natural.

Sandy shown us that New York needs it and Katrina shown us that New Orleans needs it.

If I was running things I'd consider strongly the poor and balance my caps on pollution against that. Shouldn't we?

 

[Redfish]

Before I do this again, tell me who you consider to be a legitimate expert on the subject.

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

 

[Redfish]

I support strengthen levies and infrastructure for cities like New Orleans, New York and Miami to deal with a climate charge. I think this is a good idea even if this is natural.

Sandy shown us that New York needs it and Katrina shown us that New Orleans needs it.

If I was running things I'd consider strongly the poor and balance my caps on pollution against that. Shouldn't we?

The NOLA levees and pumping stations have been greatly upgraded since Katrina. Pretty hard to put levees around miami and new york.

 

[RDD_1210]

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

Tell me who, in your opinion, is a valid unbiased scientific source. Specifically. I have a sneaking suspicion that whoever I post, you'll attack as a biased source.

So let's start by you telling me who, in your opinion is a scientific expert capable of being an unbiased source of credible climate information.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

In a nutshell you don't believe them and you don't know why.

 

[westwall]

Before I do this again, tell me who you consider to be a legitimate expert on the subject.

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Do you even know what measureable means? Here's a hint...this ain't it...

"The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.1"

For something to be measurable it must be predictive (may doesn't count as a prediction, may is a word used by psychics the world over) it must have algorithms or empirical data that ANYONE can run, in other words it MUST BE REPEATABLE.

Try again.

 

[RDD_1210]

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

In a nutshell you don't believe them and you don't know why.

Bingo!

"something, something.....MUSLIM!"

 

[Redfish]

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

Tell me who, in your opinion, is a valid unbiased scientific source. Specifically. I have a sneaking suspicion that whoever I post, you'll attack as a biased source.

So let's start by you telling me who, in your opinion is a scientific expert capable of being an unbiased source of credible climate information.

to be fair, there probably isn't one. But to me the best thing to do is to look at the data that is available to all of us. average temperatures over the years, sea levels over the years, average numbers of hurricanes, tzunamis, tornadoes, floods, cyclones, etc. Ice cores, none of it supports a theory that the acts of human beings have ever had any affect on the climate of the earth.

Yes, some of the data shows increases in CO2, so what? there is no evidence that CO2 causes global warming, CO2 is not a pollutant, plant life cannot survive without it.

The who AGW deal was cooked up in order to place more controls on the day to day activities of us and to collect more money for the govt in the process.

lets not confuse pollution with climate change, we need to control pollution of the air and water--that is a necessary action.

Instead of a war on coal as obozo wants, how about finding ways to use coal that do not produce emissions? Don't tell me that humans are incapable of doing that.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I consider anyone credible who can provide MEAUSURABLE EMPIRICAL DATA. That means no computer models.

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Do you even know what measureable means? Here's a hint...this ain't it...

"The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.1"

For something to be measurable it must be predictive (may doesn't count as a prediction, may is a word used by psychics the world over) it must have algorithms or empirical data that ANYONE can run, in other words it MUST BE REPEATABLE.

Try again.

So you don't believe in theories at all. Gravity, relativity, space etc all of it is bunk.

 

[Redfish]

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

In a nutshell you don't believe them and you don't know why.

I don't believe them because I am an intelligent human being who is capable of looking at all of the evidence and reaching a logical conclusion. If the evidence supported AGW then I would admit it, but it does not.

as to someones muslim comment, NASA has been assigned a task to work on muslim outreach, clearly right from their mission statement

 

[RDD_1210]

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

In a nutshell you don't believe them and you don't know why.

I don't believe them because I am an intelligent human being who is capable of looking at all of the evidence and reaching a logical conclusion. If the evidence supported AGW then I would admit it, but it does not.

as to someones muslim comment, NASA has been assigned a task to work on muslim outreach, clearly right from their mission statement

How the hell can you say you're intelligent and in the same breath pretend that there is not overwhelming evidence that man does in fact have an impact on global climate change? There are countless of international scientific organizations who agree that the evidence is there to support this claim and you discount ALL of it, because you think that every one of them has a hidden agenda. And you call yourself intelligent and logical. That's fucking breath taking.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Theories, BTW, who does NASA work for and who provides its funding? How is that NASA muslim outreach working out? when will we send an ayatollah into space? Oh, I forgot, we now depend on the Russians for space travel.

and you cite NASA as a valid unbiased source????? of propagands maybe, but not scientific facts.

In a nutshell you don't believe them and you don't know why.

I don't believe them because I am an intelligent human being who is capable of looking at all of the evidence and reaching a logical conclusion. If the evidence supported AGW then I would admit it, but it does not.

as to someones muslim comment, NASA has been assigned a task to work on muslim outreach, clearly right from their mission statement

Ok so lay it out or is it a secret? What evidence have you seen to dismiss the entire space programs known as NASA?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Big difference between slower warming and NO warming.

The slower warming is because of aerosols and ocean forcing the warmth into the depth.

 

[westwall]

Oh measurable data you say? This should suffice then.

Climate Change: Evidence

Do you even know what measureable means? Here's a hint...this ain't it...

"The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.1"

For something to be measurable it must be predictive (may doesn't count as a prediction, may is a word used by psychics the world over) it must have algorithms or empirical data that ANYONE can run, in other words it MUST BE REPEATABLE.

Try again.

So you don't believe in theories at all. Gravity, relativity, space etc all of it is bunk.

I have a PhD in geology silly person. All of those theories enjoy one thing that AGW "theory" doesn't, namely they have mathematical formulas that predict behaviors of objects when influenced by those phenomena. In other words you can figure out what the orbital path of a planet is using Newtonian physics modified by the Feynman constant.

You can calculate exactly how much fuel you need and the velocity required to escape Earths atmosphere based on the mass you are trying to lift using gravity constants and calculus.

Show me anything that is actually predictable to within 4 nines as regards AGW "theory".
They use "would", "could", "might", "possibly" etc. In other words they use the language of charlatans because they CAN'T predict anything. Worse yet, they actually claim that AGW can both cause more snow and less snow in winter. That it will cause more rain or less rain, etc. I have over 30 peer reviewed papers where AGW "theorists" take both sides of a prediction.

Do you even know what that means? Here's a hint, in the scientific method that is called an "untestable hypothesis". Look up what that means and the dictionary defines that as a PSEUDO-SCIENCE.

I'll let you google that term....