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.
And STILL, you KEEP using the term "climate change" without even offering up a definition for the term... And now you're claiming that I offered up a definition and that you are "abiding by it"... I've never offered a definition; I have only ever asked YOU for one...Strawman I never said the math was complicated, it's just to messy. You expect me to put a bunch of math with special symbols on this text editor?"Too complicated" mantra and "you don't understand" mantra were both dismissed on sight...
I asked you to provide me with a definition for "climate change", as you are continuously making use of the term. You have yet to provide any definition for it...
Your post on this thread was that millions of thermometers were needed for accuracy. You were not concerned about climate change in general, you were concerned only with temperature. I am abiding by your definition of climate change.
Here is that part of post #401 that you missed.
However, since you are limiting the subject to earth surface temperature, my response only addressed that aspect of climate change.
.
It WAS circular, Crick... I bolded the areas which were circular and explained to you WHY they were circular. It's not my problem that you are outright denying logic...I gave you a definition for anthropogenic global warming that was not circular, yet you continued to claim that it was. This is why I have been suggesting you are simply trying to avoid debate.
Sorry you don't understand.And STILL, you KEEP using the term "climate change" without even offering up a definition for the term... And now you're claiming that I offered up a definition and that you are "abiding by it"... I've never offered a definition; I have only ever asked YOU for one...
I have no idea what you are even talking about when you say "climate change"... It is a meaningless buzzword.
Neither do YOU, Wuwei... It is a circularly-defined buzzword... It is meaningless... Any argument based on it is a void argument. You need to define your terms, Wuwei...Sorry you don't understand.And STILL, you KEEP using the term "climate change" without even offering up a definition for the term... And now you're claiming that I offered up a definition and that you are "abiding by it"... I've never offered a definition; I have only ever asked YOU for one...
I have no idea what you are even talking about when you say "climate change"... It is a meaningless buzzword.
Neither do YOU, Wuwei... It is a circularly-defined buzzword... It is meaningless... Any argument based on it is a void argument. You need to define your terms, Wuwei...Sorry you don't understand.And STILL, you KEEP using the term "climate change" without even offering up a definition for the term... And now you're claiming that I offered up a definition and that you are "abiding by it"... I've never offered a definition; I have only ever asked YOU for one...
I have no idea what you are even talking about when you say "climate change"... It is a meaningless buzzword.
Neither do YOU, Wuwei... It is a circularly-defined buzzword... It is meaningless... Any argument based on it is a void argument. You need to define your terms, Wuwei...
I looked through them all, and there is nothing there that could be construed in any way to be observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....as with all warmest propaganda, there are some observations, and great big honking, handwaving hysterical assumptions hung on those observations...nothing like actual evidence to support the claims......you have to be willing to simply believe...
Of course if you believe there is observed, measured evidence there that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability, by all means cut and paste it here, or point it out and I will be happy to go look.
It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real.I looked through them all, and there is nothing there that could be construed in any way to be observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....as with all warmest propaganda, there are some observations, and great big honking, handwaving hysterical assumptions hung on those observations...nothing like actual evidence to support the claims......you have to be willing to simply believe...
Of course if you believe there is observed, measured evidence there that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability, by all means cut and paste it here, or point it out and I will be happy to go look.
While you bury your ignorant head in the sand...
It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real. Only Republicans and corporations that pollute a lot don't know. Interesting.
two GOP lawmakers are pushing proposals that abandon the party’s outright climate change denial.
some Republicans are starting to shift on climate change as the center of the debate slides left toward policies that could make a dent in surging greenhouse gas emissions.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who is a close ally of President Donald Trump and who in the last Congress proposed a bill to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, drafted a nonbinding resolution staking out a Green Real Deal that would acknowledge the threat climate change poses to “human health and safety” in “communities across the United States.” The document, which Politico published last week, does not set targets for emission cuts but calls for ramping up low-carbon investments and “otherwise reducing or achieving net-zero emissions from fossil energy.”
On Monday, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) proposed a New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy that he said would “double federal funding for energy research” and implement a five-year plan to “create new sources of cheap, clean energy.”
“The purpose of the original Manhattan Project during World War II was to find a way to split the atom and build a bomb before Germany could,” he wrote in an op-ed for Fox News. “Instead of ending a war, the goal of this New Manhattan Project will be to minimize the disruption on our lives and economies caused by climate change, to clean the air and to raise family incomes.”
It’s difficult to see the proposals becoming law while Trump, who routinely mocks climate science, remains in the White House and mainstream Republicans and their fossil fuel benefactors continue to downplay increasingly dire forecasts for warming in the coming decades.
But even if the first two Republican proposals to counter the Green New Deal don’t yet amount to an earthquake for the GOP, they are a rumble. The proposals also offer hints at where policy talks may go if Democrats retake the presidency or Senate in the 2020 elections.
“The tectonic plates are shifting,” Joseph Majkut, a climate policy expert at the conservative Niskanen Center, said by phone.
Until last year, climate change ranked low in surveys of voters’ concerns. But the figures began inching up among Republicans in 2018. In December, two-thirds of voters said they were very or somewhat concerned about new climate warnings in a Politico/Morning Consult survey. Last month a League of Conservation Voters poll of Democratic primary voters found taking action on climate change to be a top factor in deciding which candidate to support.
That’s not what the entire rest of the world thinks and all the scientists, dummyIt's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real.I looked through them all, and there is nothing there that could be construed in any way to be observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....as with all warmest propaganda, there are some observations, and great big honking, handwaving hysterical assumptions hung on those observations...nothing like actual evidence to support the claims......you have to be willing to simply believe...
Of course if you believe there is observed, measured evidence there that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability, by all means cut and paste it here, or point it out and I will be happy to go look.
While you bury your ignorant head in the sand...
It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real. Only Republicans and corporations that pollute a lot don't know. Interesting.
two GOP lawmakers are pushing proposals that abandon the party’s outright climate change denial.
some Republicans are starting to shift on climate change as the center of the debate slides left toward policies that could make a dent in surging greenhouse gas emissions.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who is a close ally of President Donald Trump and who in the last Congress proposed a bill to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, drafted a nonbinding resolution staking out a Green Real Deal that would acknowledge the threat climate change poses to “human health and safety” in “communities across the United States.” The document, which Politico published last week, does not set targets for emission cuts but calls for ramping up low-carbon investments and “otherwise reducing or achieving net-zero emissions from fossil energy.”
On Monday, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) proposed a New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy that he said would “double federal funding for energy research” and implement a five-year plan to “create new sources of cheap, clean energy.”
“The purpose of the original Manhattan Project during World War II was to find a way to split the atom and build a bomb before Germany could,” he wrote in an op-ed for Fox News. “Instead of ending a war, the goal of this New Manhattan Project will be to minimize the disruption on our lives and economies caused by climate change, to clean the air and to raise family incomes.”
It’s difficult to see the proposals becoming law while Trump, who routinely mocks climate science, remains in the White House and mainstream Republicans and their fossil fuel benefactors continue to downplay increasingly dire forecasts for warming in the coming decades.
But even if the first two Republican proposals to counter the Green New Deal don’t yet amount to an earthquake for the GOP, they are a rumble. The proposals also offer hints at where policy talks may go if Democrats retake the presidency or Senate in the 2020 elections.
“The tectonic plates are shifting,” Joseph Majkut, a climate policy expert at the conservative Niskanen Center, said by phone.
Until last year, climate change ranked low in surveys of voters’ concerns. But the figures began inching up among Republicans in 2018. In December, two-thirds of voters said they were very or somewhat concerned about new climate warnings in a Politico/Morning Consult survey. Last month a League of Conservation Voters poll of Democratic primary voters found taking action on climate change to be a top factor in deciding which candidate to support.
The Little Ice Age ended. It's in all the history books.
That’s not what the entire rest of the world thinks and all the scientists, dummyIt's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real.I looked through them all, and there is nothing there that could be construed in any way to be observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....as with all warmest propaganda, there are some observations, and great big honking, handwaving hysterical assumptions hung on those observations...nothing like actual evidence to support the claims......you have to be willing to simply believe...
Of course if you believe there is observed, measured evidence there that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability, by all means cut and paste it here, or point it out and I will be happy to go look.
While you bury your ignorant head in the sand...
It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real. Only Republicans and corporations that pollute a lot don't know. Interesting.
two GOP lawmakers are pushing proposals that abandon the party’s outright climate change denial.
some Republicans are starting to shift on climate change as the center of the debate slides left toward policies that could make a dent in surging greenhouse gas emissions.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who is a close ally of President Donald Trump and who in the last Congress proposed a bill to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, drafted a nonbinding resolution staking out a Green Real Deal that would acknowledge the threat climate change poses to “human health and safety” in “communities across the United States.” The document, which Politico published last week, does not set targets for emission cuts but calls for ramping up low-carbon investments and “otherwise reducing or achieving net-zero emissions from fossil energy.”
On Monday, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) proposed a New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy that he said would “double federal funding for energy research” and implement a five-year plan to “create new sources of cheap, clean energy.”
“The purpose of the original Manhattan Project during World War II was to find a way to split the atom and build a bomb before Germany could,” he wrote in an op-ed for Fox News. “Instead of ending a war, the goal of this New Manhattan Project will be to minimize the disruption on our lives and economies caused by climate change, to clean the air and to raise family incomes.”
It’s difficult to see the proposals becoming law while Trump, who routinely mocks climate science, remains in the White House and mainstream Republicans and their fossil fuel benefactors continue to downplay increasingly dire forecasts for warming in the coming decades.
But even if the first two Republican proposals to counter the Green New Deal don’t yet amount to an earthquake for the GOP, they are a rumble. The proposals also offer hints at where policy talks may go if Democrats retake the presidency or Senate in the 2020 elections.
“The tectonic plates are shifting,” Joseph Majkut, a climate policy expert at the conservative Niskanen Center, said by phone.
Until last year, climate change ranked low in surveys of voters’ concerns. But the figures began inching up among Republicans in 2018. In December, two-thirds of voters said they were very or somewhat concerned about new climate warnings in a Politico/Morning Consult survey. Last month a League of Conservation Voters poll of Democratic primary voters found taking action on climate change to be a top factor in deciding which candidate to support.
The Little Ice Age ended. It's in all the history books.
IdiotThat’s not what the entire rest of the world thinks and all the scientists, dummyIt's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real.I looked through them all, and there is nothing there that could be construed in any way to be observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....as with all warmest propaganda, there are some observations, and great big honking, handwaving hysterical assumptions hung on those observations...nothing like actual evidence to support the claims......you have to be willing to simply believe...
Of course if you believe there is observed, measured evidence there that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability, by all means cut and paste it here, or point it out and I will be happy to go look.
While you bury your ignorant head in the sand...
It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real. Only Republicans and corporations that pollute a lot don't know. Interesting.
two GOP lawmakers are pushing proposals that abandon the party’s outright climate change denial.
some Republicans are starting to shift on climate change as the center of the debate slides left toward policies that could make a dent in surging greenhouse gas emissions.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who is a close ally of President Donald Trump and who in the last Congress proposed a bill to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, drafted a nonbinding resolution staking out a Green Real Deal that would acknowledge the threat climate change poses to “human health and safety” in “communities across the United States.” The document, which Politico published last week, does not set targets for emission cuts but calls for ramping up low-carbon investments and “otherwise reducing or achieving net-zero emissions from fossil energy.”
On Monday, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) proposed a New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy that he said would “double federal funding for energy research” and implement a five-year plan to “create new sources of cheap, clean energy.”
“The purpose of the original Manhattan Project during World War II was to find a way to split the atom and build a bomb before Germany could,” he wrote in an op-ed for Fox News. “Instead of ending a war, the goal of this New Manhattan Project will be to minimize the disruption on our lives and economies caused by climate change, to clean the air and to raise family incomes.”
It’s difficult to see the proposals becoming law while Trump, who routinely mocks climate science, remains in the White House and mainstream Republicans and their fossil fuel benefactors continue to downplay increasingly dire forecasts for warming in the coming decades.
But even if the first two Republican proposals to counter the Green New Deal don’t yet amount to an earthquake for the GOP, they are a rumble. The proposals also offer hints at where policy talks may go if Democrats retake the presidency or Senate in the 2020 elections.
“The tectonic plates are shifting,” Joseph Majkut, a climate policy expert at the conservative Niskanen Center, said by phone.
Until last year, climate change ranked low in surveys of voters’ concerns. But the figures began inching up among Republicans in 2018. In December, two-thirds of voters said they were very or somewhat concerned about new climate warnings in a Politico/Morning Consult survey. Last month a League of Conservation Voters poll of Democratic primary voters found taking action on climate change to be a top factor in deciding which candidate to support.
The Little Ice Age ended. It's in all the history books.
The Little Ice Age ended. It's in all the history books.
That’s not what the entire rest of the world thinks
The entire rest of the world thinks the Little Ice Age never ended? Morons.
Yes, I did... and that's because you DO need AT LEAST that many. If you want an accurate global temperature measurement, you can't use the thermometers as we have them now, "adjust" the numbers a bit, and call them good. Thermometers MUST be uniformly spaced AND simultaneously read by the same observer to remove biases and to even begin a sensible statistical analysis.You started out simply saying that you need more than 200 million thermometers to measure an average temperature on Earth.
You didn't focus on anything. You haven't even gotten more in-depth about anything as of yet... You haven't even made an argument for me TO understand...I disagreed and was focusing on the nature of statistical Sampling Theory on measurements. You didn't understand that.
I just want you to tell me what definition of "global warming"/"climate change" you are operating under... I want you to define the term in a non-circular way. You are purposely avoiding this point, since you can't offer up anything but a circular definition... Basing an argument on a circularly-defined/undefined word renders a void argument. I'd say that bit is Logic 101, but that might even be an insult to Logic 101...If you now want to argue circular buzzwords I simply am not interested.
To see how the earth's average temperature changes from one year to the next.
It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real. Only Republicans and corporations that pollute a lot don't know. Interesting.
There are plenty of papers. Where u been?It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real. Only Republicans and corporations that pollute a lot don't know. Interesting.
Who ever said that climate change isn't real? Not me.
Human caused climate change, however, remains unproven. And tell me, how do you suppose all these people "know" that we are causing the climate to change when there has never been a single paper published in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and ascribed to so called greenhouse gasses.
Wouldn't you expect at least one such paper to be published before folks start making claims about how they "know" we are causing the climate to change?
There are plenty of papers. Where u been?It's funny that every country in the world knows global warming is real, half the USA knows it's real, 99% of scientists know it's real. Only Republicans and corporations that pollute a lot don't know. Interesting.
Who ever said that climate change isn't real? Not me.
Human caused climate change, however, remains unproven. And tell me, how do you suppose all these people "know" that we are causing the climate to change when there has never been a single paper published in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and ascribed to so called greenhouse gasses.
Wouldn't you expect at least one such paper to be published before folks start making claims about how they "know" we are causing the climate to change?
We know there is no man made global warming because the yahoos that says it is are the ones creating false data to prove it.
