How to Explain Climate Change to Neanderthals

[westwall]

SSDD, you are as worthless as worthless can get.

Now to Westwall

www.ipcc.ch

Now respond to post #222. You ask six questions. I answer them and you just walk away. Why should anyone bother getting into a debate with childish shite behavior like that?

I see opinion and propaganda. I see no facts. Try again.

I predicted that you would respond in this manner. See every post in which I called you an ignorant asshole.

Your comments about the IPCC's assessment reports are completely false. We're not going to move much further till you get that crap out of your system.












Yes. We know that your ability to call people names is at about the third grade level. Congrats. Now. Once again for the dunce in the corner.. Present us with empirical data that supports the theory of AGW. It's not a hard question to answer if we are to believe you. So how about you produce something.

The IPCC presents OPINION. Learn the damned difference you ignorant twat.

The only "crap" in the system is from the IPCC. You are a propagandist for them.. That much is clear. Do they pay you or are you merely a useful idiot?

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[Crick]

The only "crap" in the system is from the IPCC. You are a propagandist for them.. That much is clear. Do they pay you or are you merely a useful idiot?

Please explain how "crap" has convinced 97% of the world's climate scientists of its validity?

 

[westwall]

The only "crap" in the system is from the IPCC. You are a propagandist for them.. That much is clear. Do they pay you or are you merely a useful idiot?

Please explain how "crap" has convinced 97% of the world's climate scientists of its validity?

Money honey. Take the money away and no one would give a rats ass about the IPCC and their manufactured emergency.

 

[flacaltenn]

The Reality of Climate Change: 10 Myths Busted

All that is just dangerously stupid. Especially quoting Mann and SkepShitScience.com.

 

[flacaltenn]

The only "crap" in the system is from the IPCC. You are a propagandist for them.. That much is clear. Do they pay you or are you merely a useful idiot?

Please explain how "crap" has convinced 97% of the world's climate scientists of its validity?

There is no 97% of scientists that KNOW what the climate sensitivity numbers are. Or that agree on the percentage of warming attributable to man's action or that agree that a 2 deg tipping is irreversible and catastrophic. There are the issues. It's Neanderthals like you that worship labcoats and UN charades for relevance in the world. And you STILL don't understand what skeptics are skeptical about. You're still arguing about whether it's warmed or not.

The current 100 year rate of warming was NEVER a crisis. The faulty models that frightened everybody were..

 

[flacaltenn]

What kind of brawl did I miss here? Any converted Neanderthals???
You know -- if the globe had been a bit warmer in their day --- we might all be Neanderthal today..

 

[Billy_Bob]

www.ipcc.ch

Now respond to post #222. You ask six questions. I answer them and you just walk away. Why should anyone bother getting into a debate with childish shite behavior like that?

Another appeal to authority and not a single shred of empirical evidence.. Just what I expect from idiots like crick and alarmists in general.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[Crick]

Another appeal to authority and not a single shred of empirical evidence.. Just what I expect from idiots like crick and alarmists in general.

Another knowingly unsubstantiated assertion (akam a lie) about AR5. Just what I'd expect from Billy Bob who claims to be an atmospheric physicist

 

[Crick]

The only "crap" in the system is from the IPCC. You are a propagandist for them.. That much is clear. Do they pay you or are you merely a useful idiot?

Please explain how "crap" has convinced 97% of the world's climate scientists of its validity?

There is no 97% of scientists that KNOW what the climate sensitivity numbers are. Or that agree on the percentage of warming attributable to man's action or that agree that a 2 deg tipping is irreversible and catastrophic. There are the issues. It's Neanderthals like you that worship labcoats and UN charades for relevance in the world. And you STILL don't understand what skeptics are skeptical about. You're still arguing about whether it's warmed or not.

The current 100 year rate of warming was NEVER a crisis. The faulty models that frightened everybody were..

Why do you find it necessary to twist these statements? 97% of publishing climate scientists agree with the IPCC's conclusions. That is VERY good evidence that those conclusions are well supported by the science. All of you do nothing but tell us there is no evidence, that the IPCC puts out crap or that it lies, but you never demonstrate ANY of that.

And there isn't a skeptic on the denier side of this room. Not one.

 

[Old Rocks]

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

You clearly made the choice to swill that kool aid.

However, speaking of dumb, it is appropriate to talk about you.

• What scientific evidence most profoundly convinced you that humans have ever had even the slightest ability to so dramatically impact global climate "change?"
• Based on the most exacting, and rigorous scientific data, how much of the CO2 which humans have put into the atmosphere "caused" or is now causing this global climate change?
• Are you personally of the opinion that it is properly called "global climate CHANGE?" Or do you prefer the less ambiguous "global climate WARMING?" Which is it? How did you come to that conclusion?
• Precisely speaking, how much should humans reduce in terms of carbon emissions in order to slow and then stop and then, maybe, reverse the change humans caused to the world's climate? I mean, humans do have the ability to CAUSE climate change, right? And we do have the ability to change it or reverse it, right? And the scientific evidence for those human capabilities is -- what?
  
• Let's place modeling on a back burner for a moment. Instead, please refer all the dumb deniers to the actual scientific data that establishes the correlation between the carbon which humans have dumped into the world's ecosystem and the "change" in planetary climate.

I look forward to you talking down some more to all those who don't immediately accept all your well founded assertions and presuppositions.

Easy.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

American Institute of Physics

 

[mamooth]

For the rational people, life is good. We've been vindicated completely, proven right about every single thing. And now we get to see the final humiliation of the crybaby denier cranks that we've been playing whack-a-mole with for so many years (a stupid denier lie pops up, we whack it down, another one pops up, and so on). The current denier rage-weeping is quite entertaining. That's all they're useful for now. Mmmm, this is tasty popcorn.

Yes, I am rubbing in our victory. No, I don't feel bad about that. Deniers now get off on feeling persecuted, so I make them happy by abusing them.

Now, let's see, what's new in the world of climate science this week ... not much, as it's the holidays. Today's spot of interest ... the North Pole. Temperature of around 20F now, when the normal temperature for this date is about -40F. So, 60F hotter than normal. And we thought it had been unusually warm in the eastern USA. Meanwhile, it is -40F in Greenland. Rossy Waves, can you dig it.

And in the eastern USA, we'll be back down to seasonal temperatures for the weekend ... and then it warms up again. Not what the Republicans want to see in an election year, because some of the slower people incorrectly base their views on the most recent weather. So, looks like more kook losing is in store for the right. Again, don't worry about them, they're used to it.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

So manboob is still running around in a circle like a mad dog on a leash tethered to his bedrock of foolishness.

When WE rub your nose in YOUR shit, you dopey bitch, it's to TRY to teach you that you are to go outside when it is time to shit.

Dopey bitch.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

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

You clearly made the choice to swill that kool aid.

However, speaking of dumb, it is appropriate to talk about you.

• What scientific evidence most profoundly convinced you that humans have ever had even the slightest ability to so dramatically impact global climate "change?"
• Based on the most exacting, and rigorous scientific data, how much of the CO2 which humans have put into the atmosphere "caused" or is now causing this global climate change?
• Are you personally of the opinion that it is properly called "global climate CHANGE?" Or do you prefer the less ambiguous "global climate WARMING?" Which is it? How did you come to that conclusion?
• Precisely speaking, how much should humans reduce in terms of carbon emissions in order to slow and then stop and then, maybe, reverse the change humans caused to the world's climate? I mean, humans do have the ability to CAUSE climate change, right? And we do have the ability to change it or reverse it, right? And the scientific evidence for those human capabilities is -- what?
  
• Let's place modeling on a back burner for a moment. Instead, please refer all the dumb deniers to the actual scientific data that establishes the correlation between the carbon which humans have dumped into the world's ecosystem and the "change" in planetary climate.

I look forward to you talking down some more to all those who don't immediately accept all your well founded assertions and presuppositions.

Easy.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

American Institute of Physics

The notion, expressed in the Tyndall speculation to which you just linked us, of greenhouse gasses being released by humankind somehow causing a greenhouse effect doesn't actually qualify as scientific "evidence."

Besides, the question wasn't addressed to you. It was addressed to the sanctimonious author of the OP.

We've all had more than plenty of your lazy smirking self-satisfied banalities.

 

[flacaltenn]

97% of publishing climate scientists agree with the IPCC's conclusions.
And there isn't a skeptic on the denier side of this room. Not one.

That's total BULLSHIT Bullwinkle and you know it. There is no evidence whatsoever that 97% of Climate scientists accept the IPCC reports as Holy Scripture. First -- there is a WIDE RANGE of questions and scenarios in those reports and very few SPECIFIC conclusions. And Second -- those conclusions have largely been a moving target over the years.

I don't know where you get this shit. Certainly not was quoted in that crap Nutti SkepSchitScience poll of yours.

And I am a climate skeptic.

 

[Andylusion]

1) The vast majority of climate scientists agree with the IPCC. The number that disagree is approximately 1%. ONE PERCENT.

Are you telling me, that you with your degree and education, have decided that in your world, truth is determined by a poll? Scientific truth is not determined by a poll. 99.9% of the scientists could write peer reviewed papers, saying the world is flat, doesn't make it so.

As for the poll itself, what poll is this?

What specific statements Judith Curry accepts or denies, is irrelevant to my point.

You said very specifically, that the "science was settled". With all your degrees and education, you don't seem to understand the words you are using. "settled" doesn't mean 'debating and arguing over the fundamental aspects' of the science. If only 50% of the warming is due to humans, that is a huge difference from the "it's all us" theory.

The chance of us causing an eco-armageddon when 50% of the warming is outside of our control, is extremely remote.

That again, is beside the point. You said the science was settled. You are wrong. It is not. Period. End of story.... by your own statements, you lose.

 

[Old Rocks]

So manboob is still running around in a circle like a mad dog on a leash tethered to his bedrock of foolishness.

When WE rub your nose in YOUR shit, you dopey bitch, it's to TRY to teach you that you are to go outside when it is time to shit.

Dopey bitch.

Such an erudite reply. I salute the intellect it demonstrates.

 

[Old Rocks]

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

You clearly made the choice to swill that kool aid.

However, speaking of dumb, it is appropriate to talk about you.

• What scientific evidence most profoundly convinced you that humans have ever had even the slightest ability to so dramatically impact global climate "change?"
• Based on the most exacting, and rigorous scientific data, how much of the CO2 which humans have put into the atmosphere "caused" or is now causing this global climate change?
• Are you personally of the opinion that it is properly called "global climate CHANGE?" Or do you prefer the less ambiguous "global climate WARMING?" Which is it? How did you come to that conclusion?
• Precisely speaking, how much should humans reduce in terms of carbon emissions in order to slow and then stop and then, maybe, reverse the change humans caused to the world's climate? I mean, humans do have the ability to CAUSE climate change, right? And we do have the ability to change it or reverse it, right? And the scientific evidence for those human capabilities is -- what?
  
• Let's place modeling on a back burner for a moment. Instead, please refer all the dumb deniers to the actual scientific data that establishes the correlation between the carbon which humans have dumped into the world's ecosystem and the "change" in planetary climate.

I look forward to you talking down some more to all those who don't immediately accept all your well founded assertions and presuppositions.

Easy.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

American Institute of Physics

The notion, expressed in the Tyndall speculation to which you just linked us, of greenhouse gasses being released by humankind somehow causing a greenhouse effect doesn't actually qualify as scientific "evidence."

Besides, the question wasn't addressed to you. It was addressed to the sanctimonious author of the OP.

We've all had more than plenty of your lazy smirking self-satisfied banalities.

You dumb fuck. You don't even know what Tyndall did.

by Steve Graham • October 8, 1999

John Tyndall was a man of science—draftsman, surveyor, physics professor, mathematician, geologist, atmospheric scientist, public lecturer, and mountaineer. Throughout the course of his Irish and later, English life, he was able to express his thoughts in a manner none had seen or heard before. His ability to paint mental pictures for his audience enabled him to disseminate a popular knowledge of physical science that had not previously existed. Tyndall's original research on the radiative properties of gases as well as his work with other top scientists of his era opened up new fields of science and laid the groundwork for future scientific enterprises.

In January 1859, Tyndall began studying the radiative properties of various gases. Part of his experimentation included the construction of the first ratio spectrophotometer, which he used to measure the absorptive powers of gases such as water vapor, "carbonic acid" (now known as carbon dioxide), ozone, and hydrocarbons. Among his most important discoveries were the vast differences in the abilities of "perfectly colorless and invisible gases and vapors" to absorb and transmit radiant heat. He noted that oxygen, nitrogen, and hydrogen are almost transparent to radiant heat while other gases are quite opaque.

Tyndall's experiments also showed that molecules of water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone are the best absorbers of heat radiation, and that even in small quantities, these gases absorb much more strongly than the atmosphere itself. He concluded that among the constituents of the atmosphere, water vapor is the strongest absorber of radiant heat and is therefore the most important gas controlling Earth's surface temperature. He said, without water vapor, the Earth's surface would be "held fast in the iron grip of frost." He later speculated on how fluctuations in water vapor and carbon dioxide could be related to climate change.

John Tyndall : Feature Articles