Only because you can't disagree with any of my three points and are too dishonest to admit it.End of conversation.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Only because you can't disagree with any of my three points and are too dishonest to admit it.End of conversation.
How much greater do you believe the feedback is compared to the radiative forcing effect of CO2? Surely you can tell me that, right? That's not asking too much from you, is it?Read TS.3.
End of conversation.
Read TS.3.
End of conversation.
This?Can you provide the expected values that Fig TS.3(b) uses ...
Your attempts to impress the audience are really fucking pathetic. Please explain the significance of your two queries to this 'discussion'? And do explain how using deviation will "crash those results".and also how the signal-to-noise ratio was calculated ... methods that use the square of standard deviation in the denominator will crash those result big time ...
Bullshit.The IPCC doesn't allow dissent ... therefore it's not scientific ... strictly political ... and full of statistics ...
It does not make sense to have solar panels anywhere.in some parts of the country it doesnt make sense to not have solar panels on your house,,
It makes people feel so virtuous.It does not make sense to have solar panels anywhere.
They like government welfare, they are taking government welfareIt makes people feel so virtuous.
Are you a climate alarmist who thinks something bad is going to happen maybe 30-40 years years in the future even you dont know what it will be?It isn't
![]()
Roy Spencer's latest deceit and deception
Global warming & climate change. Eavesdropping on climate science deniers, their weird pseudo-science and crazy conspiracy theories.blog.hotwhopper.com
![]()
How Roy Spencer and John Christy trick Anthony Watts and his deniers once again
Global warming & climate change. Eavesdropping on climate science deniers, their weird pseudo-science and crazy conspiracy theories.blog.hotwhopper.com
![]()
Roy Spencer’s Great Blunder, Part 3
The following is reposted from Barry Bickmore's blog - it's PART 3 of my extended critique of Roy Spencer’s The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientists (New York: Encounter Books, 2010). In this part I refer constantly to Spencer's simple...skepticalscience.com
![]()
RealClimate: How to cook a graph in three easy lessons
RealClimate: These days, when global warming inactivists need to trot out somebody with some semblance of scientific credentials (from the dwindling supply who have made themselves available for such purposes), it seems that they increasingly turn to Roy Spencer, a Principal Research Scientist...www.realclimate.org
![]()
More errors identified in contrarian climate scientists' temperature estimates | John Abraham
John Abraham: A new study suggests there are remaining biases in the oft-corrected University of Alabama at Huntsville atmospheric temperature estimateswww.theguardian.com
![]()
John Christy’s Orphan Graph
John Christy loves to use this oh-so-scientific graph when he makes his frequent appearances for climate-denying audiences. And every time, knowledgeable observer’s reaction is “WTF, wh…climatecrocks.com
![]()
Sorry deniers, even satellites confirm record global warming
The planet just had its hottest 12 months on record.archive.thinkprogress.org
Neither. I'm someone who accepts the overwhelming conclusions of mainstream science which give me enormous concern for the well being of my children and theirs and the rest of humanity in the face of the cowardice, bigotry and ignorance of people like you.Are you a climate alarmist who thinks something bad is going to happen maybe 30-40 years years in the future even you dont know what it will be?
Or a super alarmist who is sure that the human race will experience hell on earth if not extinction unless we do what greta thunberg tells us to?
You have to be one or the otherNeither. I'm someone who accepts the overwhelming conclusions of mainstream science which give me enormous concern for the well being of my children and theirs and the rest of humanity in the face of the cowardice, bigotry and ignorance of people like you.
???You have to one or the other
You don't get to define my options. I have believed we were in serious trouble due to AGW for decades. And I don't give two shits what you think about my "alarmism".If you dont think we are in serious trouble now, or soon will be, then your alarmism is fake
You have been an alarmist for decades yet the earth is still here???
You don't get to define my options. I have believed we were in serious trouble due to AGW for decades. And I don't give two shits what you think about my "alarmism".
I never said it wouldn't.You have been an alarmist for decades yet the earth is still here
Neither. I'm someone who accepts the overwhelming conclusions of mainstream science which give me enormous concern for the well being of my children and theirs and the rest of humanity in the face of the cowardice, bigotry and ignorance of people like you.
Then why are you freaked out over nothing?I never said it wouldn't.
I'm not. I'm concerned about a very real threat. Why aren't you?Then why are you freaked out over nothing?
Your imagined “threat”never materializesI'm not. I'm concerned about a very real threat. Why aren't you?
Global temperatures have not risen? Sea level has not risen? The world's snow and ice isn't melting? Species of plants and animals aren't being affected?Your imagined “threat”never materializes
Global temperatures have not risen? Sea level has not risen? The world's snow and ice isn't melting? Species of plants and animals aren't being affected?
They may have risen incrementally, but the catastrophic consequences that greenies screamed about never happenedGlobal temperatures have not risen? Sea level has not risen? The world's snow and ice isn't melting? Species of plants and animals aren't being affected?