How to Explain Climate Change to Neanderthals

[Wyatt earp]

No, the Maldives just spent over 400 million dollars on airports silly boy. No one spends that kind of money if there is the slightest possibility that the investment will be under water in 30 years. No way in hell would that money have been spent.

Get a clue,, fool...

Really? That's your argument? Wow... [shakes head]

Yes. And it's a compelling one. Puts your claims that the Maldives are going under water soon to bed I would say.

Sea-Level Rise in the Republic of Maldives | Global Warming Effects
As the flattest country on Earth, the Republic of Maldives is extremely vulnerable to rising sea level and faces the very real possibility that the majority of its land area will be underwater by the end of this century.4,9,16,18 Today, the white sand beaches and extensive coral reefs of the Maldives' 1,190 islands draw more than 600,000 tourists annually.2

• Sea level rise is likely to worsen existing environmental stresses in the Maldives, such as periodic flooding from storm surge, and a scarcity of freshwater for drinking and other purposes.5,11
• Given mid–level scenarios for global warming emissions,17 the Maldives is projected to experience sea level rise on the order of 1.5 feet (half a meter)—and to lose some 77 percent of its land area—by around the year 2100.4,9 If sea level were instead to rise by 3 feet (1 meter), the Maldives could be almost completely inundated by about 2085.18
• The Maldivian government has identified many potential strategies for adapting to rising seas, but is also considering relocating its people to a new homeland.19,20

God are you stupid.

Ahhhh yes the ever popular claim. Here's the deal doofus, the world operates via cause and effect. Something happens which causes something else to happen. Only you religious nutters deny that. IF the waters were rising no one in their right mind would invest 400 million of their hard earned dollars into a product that would be destroyed before they were able to get their investment back, and more importantly make at least some profit from it.

Cause....and effect.

I know you believe in magic and all those different volcano Gods, but really, the planet is a cause and effect world. You should study some science so you can understand how that works...

cause ,man made climate change or to be more accurate climate change that would naturally take billions of years sped up drastically
By human activities.

Billions of years? You need to go back to school....




Explain this how did the great Sahara desert go from tropical to dry in only a few thousand years?


From Bountiful to Barren: Rainfall Decrease Left the Sahara Out to Dry

A finding that may help scientists better predict the pace of climate change, research published in Science shows how the Sahara Desert, a region as big as the U.S. that stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea across northern Africa, went from bountiful to bone-dry over a period of several thousand years.






Sahara Went from Green to Desert in a Flash

North Africa's sudden geographical transformation 5,000 years ago was one of the planet's most dramatic climate shifts.

The transformation took place nearly simultaneously across the continent's northern half, a new study finds. The results will appear in an upcoming issue of the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters.

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[westwall]

Yes. And it's a compelling one. Puts your claims that the Maldives are going under water soon to bed I would say.

Sea-Level Rise in the Republic of Maldives | Global Warming Effects
As the flattest country on Earth, the Republic of Maldives is extremely vulnerable to rising sea level and faces the very real possibility that the majority of its land area will be underwater by the end of this century.4,9,16,18 Today, the white sand beaches and extensive coral reefs of the Maldives' 1,190 islands draw more than 600,000 tourists annually.2

• Sea level rise is likely to worsen existing environmental stresses in the Maldives, such as periodic flooding from storm surge, and a scarcity of freshwater for drinking and other purposes.5,11
• Given mid–level scenarios for global warming emissions,17 the Maldives is projected to experience sea level rise on the order of 1.5 feet (half a meter)—and to lose some 77 percent of its land area—by around the year 2100.4,9 If sea level were instead to rise by 3 feet (1 meter), the Maldives could be almost completely inundated by about 2085.18
• The Maldivian government has identified many potential strategies for adapting to rising seas, but is also considering relocating its people to a new homeland.19,20

God are you stupid.

Ahhhh yes the ever popular claim. Here's the deal doofus, the world operates via cause and effect. Something happens which causes something else to happen. Only you religious nutters deny that. IF the waters were rising no one in their right mind would invest 400 million of their hard earned dollars into a product that would be destroyed before they were able to get their investment back, and more importantly make at least some profit from it.

Cause....and effect.

I know you believe in magic and all those different volcano Gods, but really, the planet is a cause and effect world. You should study some science so you can understand how that works...

cause ,man made climate change or to be more accurate climate change that would naturally take billions of years sped up drastically
By human activities.

And not one shred of actual data to support the theory. Not one. Let me know when you have something other than science fiction dear boy...

Everything is science fiction until it's not.

No. Actually it's not. Though science fiction certainly benefited from science.

 

[Crick]

The claim that mainstream science has no data or no empirical data to support AGW is a lie and it is a stupid one.

 

[SSDD]

How To Explain Climate Change To A Neanderthal
There...a severely DUMBED down explanation for the slower folks who just can't seem to grasp the concept

OK...I read your link and have some questions.....questions that any Neanderthal might have if you were expecting him to alter his hard won lifestyle for the sake of your claims of imminent catastrophe. Fair enough? I mean, you are making a claim, and you expect me to act upon it....it is reasonable for me to expect for you to be able to be able to back up your claim to some significant degree is it not?

1. Do you have any actual empirical evidence that would support the claim that the climate today is unprecedented? What sort of observed data do you have that prove that the climate today is outside the bounds of natural variability....or even approaching the borderlands of natural variability for that matter? If you are depending on proxy data, what sort of proxy data do you have that would have the sort of resolution required to make any claim at all about the short climate window we are talking about here?

2. You claim that mankind is altering the climate which must mean that you are able to tease out a human fingerprint from all of the climate noise. You must be able to do it otherwise the claim that man is changing the climate to his own detriment would be nothing more than hysterical alarmist handwaving based on nothing more than political motivations.. So what sort of empirical evidence do you have that would put a precise number on the climate sensitivity to CO2? A precise number would be required if you are going to claim that X percent of the warming we have seen over the past century and a half is due to mankind.

3. The climate is a chaotic system. Can you state with any confidence at all that climate science knows all of the natural variables that effect the climate....how much each variable alone affects the climate (put a number to it) and how that numerical variable changes when it interacts with one, or multiple other variables? You would need to be able to do that with a high degree of accuracy in order to identify a human fingerprint within the chaos that is the natural variability of the climate.

4. Aside from the claim that man is causing warming...there is the claim that warming is going to cause us harm. Can you state with any certainty precisely what the ideal temperature is for life on planet earth? Upon what empirical evidence do you base your claim if you have one?

5. This action you want for me to take based upon your claim is going to cost money...and if you want everyone to act, it is going to cost a lot of money....a whole great big stinking pile of money. Money that we might use, for example to address the very real and serious environmental problems facing this planet right now....pollution, habitat loss, etc.

How much change in the climate do you believe will result from our taking this action that you want? What will the cost to benefit ratio be if we take this action...keep in mind that unless you can state with any precision what the ideal temperature for life on planet earth is, any claim that the cost is worth it doesn't carry much weight. Relative to the present temperature, will this action you want us to take move us towards, or away from the ideal temperature for life on planet earth...and for that matter, can you give any assurance based on real empirical evidence that making this change will result in any alteration of the present climate at all.

Now I know that I am just a dumb old Neanderthal in the eyes of erudite elites such as yourself, but these are the questions that us dumb old Neanderthals have. Can you answer them with anything like convincing data? Can you even answer one with anything like convincing data?

If you can, by all means speak..I am eager to hear what you have to say. If you can't, this dumb old Neanderthal wants to know how stupid you,and people like you must be to have been convinced that man is changing the climate and that very expensive action is required on the part of nations and their people to avert the climate catastrophe that has been claimed on what amounts to zero empirical evidence?

 

[SSDD]

The claim that mainstream science has no data or no empirical data to support AGW is a lie and it is a stupid one.

Can you answer any of the questions in the post above with anything like hard fact or actual empirical data?

If you can, speak....If you can't, your silence speaks volumes regarding what mainstream science knows about the climate and what drives it, and what effect, if any, mankind is having on it.

 

[Crick]

Here is an empircally derived fact: God are you stupid

You are also become skilled at deception, a skill rarely developed by the honest.

I have to get to work, but before I leave, I recommend that everyone peruse IPCC Working Group I, the report on the physical science basis for the conclusions of the IPCC. Do not take SSDD's word on what you will find there because, to be blunt, he will lie to you. Read it yourself. If you have questions about what you find there, bring them up. I'm sure answers may be found.

Read. Learn. Decide. In that order.

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL.....Neanderthal winning!!!!

Top story on DRUDGE!!

Climate Models Have Been Wrong About Global Warming For Six Decades


Wont matter to the AGW k00ks but sure does explain why global warming is at the very bottom of EVERY poll asking the public about their greatest concerns for government to address.


DEAD.................LAST

 

[SSDD]

Here is an empircally derived fact: God are you stupid

So you can't even answer a single question I asked? What, were they unreasonable? Just too hard to answer? You want me to just believe because you do? Apparently your belief is based on some pretty scant evidence if you can't even answer one of the questions I asked above....they aren't even hard questions but they are questions that any thinking person should reasonably expect an answer to before taking the sort of action that you and yours want to take.

Why am I not surprised in the least that you have no answer?

 

[skookerasbil]

Is it no wonder so many refer to this global warming stuff as being fostered by a religion? Those with the ability to connect the dots and are not low-information people are able to deduce that climate alarmism is based upon blind faith and nothing else. These people are whores to the science.......meanwhile, all the evidence shows what they are basing their religion on is nearly 60 years of computer model fAiL!!!!!


ghey

 

[Crick]

Is it no wonder so many refer to this global warming stuff as being fostered by a religion?

By "so many" you mean "us deniers"; and no, it doesn't make me wonder at all. It makes me think you have no valid scientific arguments to make.

Those with the ability to connect the dots and are not low-information people are able to deduce that climate alarmism is based upon blind faith and nothing else.

So thousands of published, PhD scientists conducting research on a daily basis are "low-information people"?

These people are whores to the science.......meanwhile, all the evidence shows what they are basing their religion on is nearly 60 years of computer model fAiL!!!!!

I have rattled off the wealth of empirical information on which AGW is based often enough that I am quite certain you've seen it and thus your statement here is a willful lie.

ghey

A liar and a bigot.

 

[SSDD]

I have rattled off the wealth of empirical information on which AGW is based often enough that I am quite certain you've seen it and thus your statement here is a willful lie.[/quote]

Actually, you have rattled off no empirical evidence at all...all you have is failing models...hell you can't even provide empirical evidence to support the most basic claim of the AGW hypothesis...you believe that absorption and emission equals warming...you fail at the most basic level....and if the backscatter were happening as you believe, a tropospheric hot spot would be the inevitable result...it hasn't showed up and isn't going to.

]

 

[Old Rocks]

Of course, since this is a real scientist speaking, and not some obese junkie, our deniars and liars will not bother to watch the video. And Mr. Westwall will claim that Dr. Richard Alley is one of the 99 out of 100 scientists that does 'shit' science.

 

[Old Rocks]

I have rattled off the wealth of empirical information on which AGW is based often enough that I am quite certain you've seen it and thus your statement here is a willful lie.

Actually, you have rattled off no empirical evidence at all...all you have is failing models...hell you can't even provide empirical evidence to support the most basic claim of the AGW hypothesis...you believe that absorption and emission equals warming...you fail at the most basic level....and if the backscatter were happening as you believe, a tropospheric hot spot would be the inevitable result...it hasn't showed up and isn't going to.

][/QUOTE]

You have never posted anything but ignorant nonsense. Smart photons, and other such dingbat ideas. You are one ignorant ass, and prove it with every post.

You cannot be educated because you are willfully ignorant.

 

[SSDD]

Of course, since this is a real scientist speaking, and not some obese junkie, our deniars and liars will not bother to watch the video. And Mr. Westwall will claim that Dr. Richard Alley is one of the 99 out of 100 scientists that does 'shit' science.

I really don't want to watch 57 minutes of drivel so if you can point to a specific point in the video where he provides some empirical evidence to support even the most basic claim made by the AGW hypothesis I will certainly look at it and if it is indeed hard evidence to support the hypothesis, I will certainly look at more. My bet, however, is that you won't point to any particular place where he presents hard empirical evidence for anything....my bet is that what you have provided is just more unsupported dogma...good enough to fool you, but not good enough to fool any thinking person.

 

[Billy_Bob]

How To Explain Climate Change To A Neanderthal


There...a severely DUMBED down explanation for the slower folks who just can't seem to grasp the concept

LOL...

FIRE BRAND LEFT......

A John Cook and SKS publication of far left wing foolishness. Devoid of any facts or empirical data to back up thier horse manure assertions...

 

[SSDD]

You have never posted anything but ignorant nonsense. Smart photons, and other such dingbat ideas. You are one ignorant ass, and prove it with every post.

You cannot be educated because you are willfully ignorant.

You are just a plethora of logical fallacies aren't you? Appeals to authority, poisoning the well, circumstantial ad hominems, and on the list goes. Are you trying to use up the whole list of logical fallacies before you die?

 

[SSDD]

Which begs the question, how is it that you "data experts" never heard of Christy and Spencer at the UAH getting caught fudging the data, and when the correct sign was used to calculate the diurnal satellite drift, the satellite data suddenly matched exactly the ground data that was supposed to be the cooked data?

The problem with your complaint is that UAH agrees with the millions of radiosondes that have been sent up into the atmosphere to actually measure the temperature....the surface record doesn't agree and they seem to be adjusting as fast as they can in an attempt to keep up with the failure of the models.

 

[SSDD]

Mr. Westwall, you are such a liar. They grow wheat right up to the bases of the wind turbines in Eastern Oregon. .

And they fertilize the fields with the corpses of raptors, bats, and migratory birds which are killed in their millions by those blights on the landscape.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Of course, since this is a real scientist speaking, and not some obese junkie, our deniars and liars will not bother to watch the video. And Mr. Westwall will claim that Dr. Richard Alley is one of the 99 out of 100 scientists that does 'shit' science.

800,000 year data set at Vostok show CO2 LAGGING, not controlling. Is modern CO2 somehow different?