Global Warming Update

[ClosedCaption]

Everyone notice what an uninformed coward ClosedCaption is? He won't discuss anything in detail but instead obsesses over the definition of science. I gave him a link that backs up my statements without it having any political or other type of implications or motives.

Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its a theory. You said you dont believe theories. Why is one theory ok and another not ok?

Stomping your feet and saying "because!" doesnt count.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Everyone notice what an uninformed coward ClosedCaption is? He won't discuss anything in detail but instead obsesses over the definition of science. I gave him a link that backs up my statements without it having any political or other type of implications or motives.

Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its a theory. You said you dont believe theories. Why is one theory ok and another not ok?

Stomping your feet and saying "because!" doesnt count.

The link provides data to back up the theory. Not my fault you're too stupid to understand it.

 

[mamooth]

Climate change IS REAL. It is also a NATURALLY occuring phenomenon.

"Species have gone extinct in the past. It's a naturally occurring phenomenon. Therefore, humans can't cause any species to go extinct, and it must all be natural instead."

That's your logic. It's quite amusing. You really shouldn't be bothering the grownups with your cute but dumb stories. Away to the kiddie table with you, at least until you stop failing so hard at basic logic.

That is, in general, one way to tell scientists from deniers. Scientists have practiced logic and problem setup for years, so they're good at it. Deniers, OTOH, have actively avoided exposing themselves to logic (as it tends to burn them like sunlight burning a vampire), hence they've never learned how to think logically.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Because your "science" has a political agenda.

This science does not:Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wait but the first line says "Milankovitch theory"? You told me that theories dont count because they are unprovable yet here you are saying this theory is real?

Its a shame when the only reason you believe something is because you want to and cant explain it. Its even worse when its on display for the last 3 pages of you going between quoting science, saying science is bias, opting for cave drawings as proof, then quoting science again.

Truely awesome

I never said science was biased idiot. I said YOUR science has a motive, a political one at that. I also said if proof was provided I would go from a skeptic to a believer. But all you've offered are semantics and childish nonsense over the fucking word science.

Yeah but what you say and what you can prove are two different things. You can say you're the king of the world but the proof is what you provided so far.

Nothing.

But go on and tell everyone how theories are unproven while telling everyone your theory is right. Its fun watching you contradict and almost debate yourself.

So Gramps, Can you tell Gramps why theories are fake?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Everyone notice what an uninformed coward ClosedCaption is? He won't discuss anything in detail but instead obsesses over the definition of science. I gave him a link that backs up my statements without it having any political or other type of implications or motives.

Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its a theory. You said you dont believe theories. Why is one theory ok and another not ok?

Stomping your feet and saying "because!" doesnt count.

The link provides data to back up the theory. Not my fault you're too stupid to understand it.

If it was true it wouldnt be a theory now would it. Thats your arguement against Global Warming theory. What? Now that doesnt count anymore? Why not? Because you're peeing yourself about it?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Wait but the first line says "Milankovitch theory"? You told me that theories dont count because they are unprovable yet here you are saying this theory is real?

Its a shame when the only reason you believe something is because you want to and cant explain it. Its even worse when its on display for the last 3 pages of you going between quoting science, saying science is bias, opting for cave drawings as proof, then quoting science again.

Truely awesome

I never said science was biased idiot. I said YOUR science has a motive, a political one at that. I also said if proof was provided I would go from a skeptic to a believer. But all you've offered are semantics and childish nonsense over the fucking word science.

Yeah but what you say and what you can prove are two different things. You can say you're the king of the world but the proof is what you provided so far.

Nothing.

But go on and tell everyone how theories are unproven while telling everyone your theory is right. Its fun watching you contradict and almost debate yourself.

So Gramps, Can you tell Gramps why theories are fake?

Negged. All you've done is debated at a grammar school level. I've provide you FACTS about history as well as scientific theory that is backed up by FACTS that don't contradict themselves.

What have you offered to promote what you believe? Not a god damn thing.

As usual you bring nothing of substance to the table so we're done.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Climate change IS REAL. It is also a NATURALLY occuring phenomenon.

"Species have gone extinct in the past. It's a naturally occurring phenomenon. Therefore, humans can't cause any species to go extinct, and it must all be natural instead."

That's your logic. It's quite amusing. You really shouldn't be bothering the grownups with your cute but dumb stories. Away to the kiddie table with you, at least until you stop failing so hard at basic logic.

That is, in general, one way to tell scientists from deniers. Scientists have practiced logic and problem setup for years, so they're good at it. Deniers, OTOH, have actively avoided exposing themselves to logic (as it tends to burn them like sunlight burning a vampire), hence they've never learned how to think logically.

While you suck on the neg I just gave you read this:
Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ClosedCaption]

Yeah Egypt drawings and theories are proof now. All that was missing to make it true is Gramps blessing.

Malankovitch theory True

Global Warming Theory Not True

The difference: Gramps says it is. He cant explain why one theory is "unproven" but another theory is proven (which wouldnt make it a theory buut a fact)

He cant explain why he believes some science and dismisses others.

He cant explain why Egyptian drawings mean Earth has an axis.

He cant explain how he figures the earth moved and it wasnt the stars that moved without science.

But what he can explain is he is right and explaining or making sense comes second, Feet stamping and insistence that its true is all the weak minded idiot needs.

Seriously, Cave drawings! He's serious!

 

[ClosedCaption]

Climate change IS REAL. It is also a NATURALLY occuring phenomenon.

"Species have gone extinct in the past. It's a naturally occurring phenomenon. Therefore, humans can't cause any species to go extinct, and it must all be natural instead."

That's your logic. It's quite amusing. You really shouldn't be bothering the grownups with your cute but dumb stories. Away to the kiddie table with you, at least until you stop failing so hard at basic logic.

That is, in general, one way to tell scientists from deniers. Scientists have practiced logic and problem setup for years, so they're good at it. Deniers, OTOH, have actively avoided exposing themselves to logic (as it tends to burn them like sunlight burning a vampire), hence they've never learned how to think logically.

While you suck on the neg I just gave you read this:
Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I love it when you debate yourself.

ClosedCaption doesn't understand the difference between a hypothesis, theory & fact

Apparently you dont care anymore about the difference or your old self disagrees with your new self.

 

[Mustang]

Is it a natural cycle to fill landfills with your household garbage?

Do you drive a horse & buggy?

Flintstone mobile?

Moped?




Just stuff it

Is that a no?

NOTHING humans do is natural to the earth you moron. So what's your point?

The point is that humans are interfering in the natural processes that have driven climate change in the past. In so doing, humans have added, and continue to add, trillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

 

[flacaltenn]

Sorry you brought up the Ice Core records. Close inspection will show that OFTEN the Temperature LED the changes in CO2 concentrations. Could be real -- could be an artifact of the lousy time resolution inherent in the Ice Core records. But it's generally acknowledged that when you MELT A LOT OF GLACIER COVERED ground -- the CO2 level will follow the temperature rise.

That --- and the BEST explanation for what really DROVE AND INITIATED this series of Ice Ages is Milankovitch Cycles. Natural variations in the dynamics of Earth's orbit..

NEXT !!!!!!

NOTE: COLORS are reversed in this version of the plot..

The point I'm making isn't one of CO2 levels rising therefore temperatures rise anyway. So....

The point I'm making is that they often go hand in hand. Also, that there is an unknown out there, with the rising CO2 levels going to directions not seen before, what is the impact going to be?
We know they're a greenhouse gas and we know what greenhouse gases do.
So, we know the greenhouse effect is going to get worse.

Now, the point here is, rising temperatures and rising CO2 go hand in hand. At some point things stop, and turn around. CO2 levels drop and temperature levels drop. But we're not going to see a drop in CO2 levels now that we're pumping CO2 into the air on a massive scale.

So what will happen?

The answer is we don't know. There are educated guessed, there are just pure denials that anything is going to happen, and there is make belief.

However, you put things together, and what do you think is actually going to happen? Nothing? Destruction of humanity? You decide.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/9007900-post222.html

What I said in the post above is the most likely thing to happen. The warming for a Doubling of CO2 , is not likely to exceed 1.2degC. All the rest of the GW hysteria and hype is a side show with political objectives... The massive feedbacks from the GW Magic Multipliers are not even close to settled. They are poor guesses to how a complex climate system like the Earth survives for Millions of years without destroying itself.

 

[Ame®icano]

Sorry you brought up the Ice Core records. Close inspection will show that OFTEN the Temperature LED the changes in CO2 concentrations. Could be real -- could be an artifact of the lousy time resolution inherent in the Ice Core records. But it's generally acknowledged that when you MELT A LOT OF GLACIER COVERED ground -- the CO2 level will follow the temperature rise.

That --- and the BEST explanation for what really DROVE AND INITIATED this series of Ice Ages is Milankovitch Cycles. Natural variations in the dynamics of Earth's orbit..

NEXT !!!!!!

NOTE: COLORS are reversed in this version of the plot..

The point I'm making isn't one of CO2 levels rising therefore temperatures rise anyway. So....

The point I'm making is that they often go hand in hand. Also, that there is an unknown out there, with the rising CO2 levels going to directions not seen before, what is the impact going to be?
We know they're a greenhouse gas and we know what greenhouse gases do.
So, we know the greenhouse effect is going to get worse.

Now, the point here is, rising temperatures and rising CO2 go hand in hand. At some point things stop, and turn around. CO2 levels drop and temperature levels drop. But we're not going to see a drop in CO2 levels now that we're pumping CO2 into the air on a massive scale.

So what will happen?

The answer is we don't know. There are educated guessed, there are just pure denials that anything is going to happen, and there is make belief.

However, you put things together, and what do you think is actually going to happen? Nothing? Destruction of humanity? You decide.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/9007900-post222.html

What I said in the post above is the most likely thing to happen. The warming for a Doubling of CO2 , is not likely to exceed 1.2degC. All the rest of the GW hysteria and hype is a side show with political objectives... The massive feedbacks from the GW Magic Multipliers are not even close to settled. They are poor guesses to how a complex climate system like the Earth survives for Millions of years without destroying itself.

And because of it's complexity, climate system cannot be based on just correlation of temperature and CO2 emission. Pro GW scientists are screaming that increase of CO2 also increase the temperature. That was also a main theme of the Al Gore's movie, or should I say power point presentation. First of all, global warming science is not proven, it's settled science. Second, correlation does not prove the causation. That theory, and its still just theory is debunked.
I am not scientist, but just like many of you, I follow what's going on. I red that increase of CO2 doesn't cause temperature increase, but the other way around. If GW scientists are nor political hacks and looking for real proof, they would not settle for most convenient explanation that suits the agenda, but would look for the answers how increased CO2 causes global warming. Since there is no real explanation nor real science behind it, of course they gonna fix the data and provide settled answers. Bottom line, THAT song that they play over and over is, and will continue to pay their bills.

 

[RDD_1210]

Gramps just had his ass handed to him....repeatedly.

The best part is, it was handed to him by gramps.

 

[mamooth]

I read that increase of CO2 doesn't cause temperature increase, but the other way around.

Both are true. If you don't understand why, you need to look at the science more.

By science, I don't mean the kook right wing websites that have been feeding you bullshit in the name of politics. Looks at some real science from independent people, instead of the political hacks you've clearly been relying on.

If GW scientists are nor political hacks and looking for real proof, they would not settle for most convenient explanation that suits the agenda, but would look for the answers how increased CO2 causes global warming.

And since they've done that, you have no cause to complain. If you think there's no science behind it, you've been wildly misinformed by paid professional liars, and are grossly ignorant of the actual science.

The motivation to lie for money is on the denier side. Any honest scientist could instantly double his salary by joining the paid shills of the denier side, yet they don't. The reputable scientists deliberately choose to take a lower salary so they can keep doing honest research. That's the degree of integrity they have. AGW scientists could take money to lie, and they don't. That gives the AGW scientists credibility which the denier side lacks.

 

[Ame®icano]

Both are true. If you don't understand why, you need to look at the science more.

By science, I don't mean the kook right wing websites that have been feeding you bullshit in the name of politics. Looks at some real science from independent people, instead of the political hacks you've clearly been relying on.

Sooo, you're saying that only real science is one that is supported by the leftists. Everything else is bull shit. Interesting.

You're also saying I need to look at the science more. I'm pretty sure I know about it at least as much as you, I just don't advertize it. Here is the website, up to you if you gonna read it or not, with over 1300 peer reviewed papers on global warming.

POPULAR TECHNOLOGY

 

[Ame®icano]

And since they've done that, you have no cause to complain. If you think there's no science behind it, you've been wildly misinformed by paid professional liars, and are grossly ignorant of the actual science.

The motivation to lie for money is on the denier side. Any honest scientist could instantly double his salary by joining the paid shills of the denier side, yet they don't. The reputable scientists deliberately choose to take a lower salary so they can keep doing honest research. That's the degree of integrity they have. AGW scientists could take money to lie, and they don't. That gives the AGW scientists credibility which the denier side lacks.

No, they haven't done it. They were providing fake data, I'm sure you already heard about IPCC leaked emails etc... Someone said earlier, "most likely" and "probably" doesn't count as fact neither. There are no facts from GW scientists, just theories and so called models based on theories. Theories and models are not facts.

Sun is hot. That's a fact. Sun is hot because of nuclear fusion where hydrogen atoms are joining together into helium. That's a fact. Water freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit. That's a fact. It doesn't really matter when those facts are established, what matters is that those facts are not disprooven since its establishments.

Global warming "facts" are so strong that need to be revised, altered, settled... all that is pretty shaky for science.

 

[flacaltenn]

The point I'm making isn't one of CO2 levels rising therefore temperatures rise anyway. So....

The point I'm making is that they often go hand in hand. Also, that there is an unknown out there, with the rising CO2 levels going to directions not seen before, what is the impact going to be?
We know they're a greenhouse gas and we know what greenhouse gases do.
So, we know the greenhouse effect is going to get worse.

Now, the point here is, rising temperatures and rising CO2 go hand in hand. At some point things stop, and turn around. CO2 levels drop and temperature levels drop. But we're not going to see a drop in CO2 levels now that we're pumping CO2 into the air on a massive scale.

So what will happen?

The answer is we don't know. There are educated guessed, there are just pure denials that anything is going to happen, and there is make belief.

However, you put things together, and what do you think is actually going to happen? Nothing? Destruction of humanity? You decide.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/9007900-post222.html

What I said in the post above is the most likely thing to happen. The warming for a Doubling of CO2 , is not likely to exceed 1.2degC. All the rest of the GW hysteria and hype is a side show with political objectives... The massive feedbacks from the GW Magic Multipliers are not even close to settled. They are poor guesses to how a complex climate system like the Earth survives for Millions of years without destroying itself.

And because of it's complexity, climate system cannot be based on just correlation of temperature and CO2 emission. Pro GW scientists are screaming that increase of CO2 also increase the temperature. That was also a main theme of the Al Gore's movie, or should I say power point presentation. First of all, global warming science is not proven, it's settled science. Second, correlation does not prove the causation. That theory, and its still just theory is debunked.
I am not scientist, but just like many of you, I follow what's going on. I red that increase of CO2 doesn't cause temperature increase, but the other way around. If GW scientists are nor political hacks and looking for real proof, they would not settle for most convenient explanation that suits the agenda, but would look for the answers how increased CO2 causes global warming. Since there is no real explanation nor real science behind it, of course they gonna fix the data and provide settled answers. Bottom line, THAT song that they play over and over is, and will continue to pay their bills.

In fact, in any complex system with feedbacks, and storage and parallel delays, there should never even BE an expectation that the output (temperature) has to have shape that correlates well with any individual causal input ( like CO2 or solar insolation) . With an integral lurking in the system equation, I can create a ramp with step function for instance. Its only very recently, because of the surface temperature pause, that the geniuses involved have been forced to admit that the oceans area MAJOR heat storage function, with largely unknown characteristics. Same with delays in reaching new temperature equilibriums. Delays of multiple decades would be intuitive, but were hardly ever mentioned until the past couple of years.

 

[mamooth]

Sooo, you're saying that only real science is one that is supported by the leftists. Everything else is bull shit. Interesting.

No, I never said that. If you can't address what I actually say, just come out and say so. Don't beat around the bush.

You're also saying I need to look at the science more. I'm pretty sure I know about it at least as much as you, I just don't advertize it.

I wasn't certain before, but now I'm quite certain you're almost completely ignorant of any actual science, and are only capable of parroting.

Here is the website, up to you if you gonna read it or not, with over 1300 peer reviewed papers on global warming.

POPULAR TECHNOLOGY

Yep, you're a parrot. You haven't looked at even one of those papers. You saw an impressive number, and believed with all your heart, because it said what you wanted to hear.

No, they haven't done it. They were providing fake data, I'm sure you already heard about IPCC leaked emails etc...

Are you under the impression we haven't seen those idiot conspiracy theories a thousand times before? All you do by repeating them is advertise yourself as a brainwashed cultist. I almost feel sorry for you, as you actually probably consider yourself well-informed. That's the effect living in your cult bubble has.

Someone said earlier, "most likely" and "probably" doesn't count as fact neither. There are no facts from GW scientists, just theories and so called models based on theories. Theories and models are not facts.

Longwave IR measurements aren't theories. Nor is the earth's heat balance, the stratospheric temp, or other things we directly measure. Again, try looking at the actual science. You seem to the think the science depends on models, which marks you as totally ignorant of the science.

Why do you think it is that denialism is restricted to the kook right political fringe, while global warming science crosses all political boundaries all around the world? I'll tell you why. It's because global warming science is actual science, while denialism is a political cult. Your cult has told you what the science is, so you cherrypick facts to match.

 

[flacaltenn]

And of course Mammy dismisses 1350 skeptical papers without even passing the table of contents. Aint that right Mammy????

 

[frigidweirdo]

What I said in the post above is the most likely thing to happen. The warming for a Doubling of CO2 , is not likely to exceed 1.2degC. All the rest of the GW hysteria and hype is a side show with political objectives... The massive feedbacks from the GW Magic Multipliers are not even close to settled. They are poor guesses to how a complex climate system like the Earth survives for Millions of years without destroying itself.

So, you're claiming that CO2 at double the amount in the atmosphere will only be a 1.2 degree rise in temperatures?

Okay, let's see you evidence.

Also, what do you think a 1.2 degree rise will do to the earth?

Current sea level rise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Between 1870 and 2004, global average sea levels rose 195 mm (7.7 in), 1.46 mm (0.057 in) per year.[5] From 1950 to 2009, measurements show an average annual rise in sea level of 1.7 ± 0.3 mm per year, with satellite data showing a rise of 3.3 ± 0.4 mm per year from 1993 to 2009

So, since 1950 we've seen a rise of about 0.6 degrees in temperature and a rise of 3 inches in sea level. So double that and we're looking at a rise of 6 more inches.

What it could be like if it gets way too high.