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.
SSDD,SSDD,
Human caused global warming is a fact. Just because you want to attribute it to natural variations doesn't prove anything. Though it's beyond me how you can attribute HCGW to natural variations when humans are causing 26.8 billion tons of CO2 to be released into the atmosphere each year.
No...human caused global warming is a hypothesis...and a piss poor one at that...it is supported by almost zero observational evidence. The vast vast majority of what climate science calls science is in fact, nothing more than the out put of failing computer models....models whose predictions, by the way, fail more spectacularly every year.
Sarah G,At least you're getting the correct question finally. It's not whether global warming exists, it's how it was caused.
I like whack jobs like you who lie all the time and fear monger on message boards. You are completely lost with where you are in your life. Someone who can continue to post irrelavent crap that he can't back up. Seems like such a waste of print.Sarah G,At least you're getting the correct question finally. It's not whether global warming exists, it's how it was caused.
As I told some of the deniers here before, all the earth's volcanoes put an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere each year. But each year the activities of humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 billion tons of CO2. Which the deniers don't like to admit IS a greenhouse gas.
You can tell yourself that all you want, but it isn't going to make it true.
Your ignorance amuses me.
Go to IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and read FAR, SAR, TAR, AR4 and AR5. If you're hungry for more, read the many thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies on which those assessment reports are based.
When you have a case that can top all that evidence, come back and let us know.
Sure...great source even more sure that humans are altering the global climate based on failing models and the fact that the climate isn't cooperating with the failed hypothesis. When the models don't match the observation..then the observation must be wrong and must be "adjusted". Climate science is a joke.
If you want to convince us to reject over 13,000 peer reviewed studies and the thousands of scientists' work that have gone in to the IPCC's assessment reports, you need one HELL of a lot better argument than that.
Sarah G,At least you're getting the correct question finally. It's not whether global warming exists, it's how it was caused.
As I told some of the deniers here before, all the earth's volcanoes put an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere each year. But each year the activities of humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 billion tons of CO2. Which the deniers don't like to admit IS a greenhouse gas.
Sarah G,At least you're getting the correct question finally. It's not whether global warming exists, it's how it was caused.
As I told some of the deniers here before, all the earth's volcanoes put an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere each year. But each year the activities of humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 billion tons of CO2. Which the deniers don't like to admit IS a greenhouse gas.
I see after 20 pages you're STILL riffing on that volcanic shit. Boy -- Don't think I've missed a damn thing..
Not a word from you about the 700 billions tons of CO2 that mother nature puts up into the atmos every year.. You don't want to learn anything. You're hear to give moving lectures on cultsmashing..
No...human caused global warming is a hypothesis...and a piss poor one at that...it is supported by almost zero observational evidence. The vast vast majority of what climate science calls science is in fact, nothing more than the out put of failing computer models....models whose predictions, by the way, fail more spectacularly every year.
That virtually every climate scientist on the planet accepts it as a valid THEORY tells us, definitively, that it is no longer just a hypothesis. The amount of empirical evidence supporting the theory is mountainous and you and yours, despite much effort and many opportunities, have failed to ever falsify it or provide anything approaching a reasonable, alternative explanation for the many observations.
Westwall, you'd kill millions through malaria just so you don't have to admit to being wrong. You're a poster child for the banality of evil. As are so many deniers here. First they lost on the science, then they lost on the politics. Now, seeing no other options for their cult, their thoughts are turning to violence.
Oh, Godwin. Westwall loses.
I merely followed his lead.
flacaltenn,You can tell yourself that all you want, but it isn't going to make it true.
Your ignorance amuses me.
Go to IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and read FAR, SAR, TAR, AR4 and AR5. If you're hungry for more, read the many thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies on which those assessment reports are based.
When you have a case that can top all that evidence, come back and let us know.
Sure...great source even more sure that humans are altering the global climate based on failing models and the fact that the climate isn't cooperating with the failed hypothesis. When the models don't match the observation..then the observation must be wrong and must be "adjusted". Climate science is a joke.
If you want to convince us to reject over 13,000 peer reviewed studies and the thousands of scientists' work that have gone in to the IPCC's assessment reports, you need one HELL of a lot better argument than that.
Why don't we take them one at time? Wanna start with your favorite "the oceans ate my warming" study from BTK ? Where the T-guy Trenberth FAILED to include that surface warming from ocean absorption of heat in his PREVIOUSLY famous misnamed paper Heat Energy Diagram?
And NOW realizes that he missed one of largest variables in the Heat balance analysis -- but got the right answer anyway??
Please --- let's do that one again.. Then we can tackle the other 12,999.
Maybe this time you'll have an explanation for how the heat left the ocean surface just in time to create the "pause"..
You got nothing.. BTK has nothing.. It's all over except for the lecture from the 21st century Hitler Youth Squad who's here to back you up...
flacaltenn,Sarah G,At least you're getting the correct question finally. It's not whether global warming exists, it's how it was caused.
As I told some of the deniers here before, all the earth's volcanoes put an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere each year. But each year the activities of humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 billion tons of CO2. Which the deniers don't like to admit IS a greenhouse gas.
I see after 20 pages you're STILL riffing on that volcanic shit. Boy -- Don't think I've missed a damn thing..
Not a word from you about the 700 billions tons of CO2 that mother nature puts up into the atmos every year.. You don't want to learn anything. You're hear to give moving lectures on cultsmashing..
mamooth,Westwall, you'd kill millions through malaria just so you don't have to admit to being wrong. You're a poster child for the banality of evil. As are so many deniers here. First they lost on the science, then they lost on the politics. Now, seeing no other options for their cult, their thoughts are turning to violence.
Oh, Godwin. Westwall loses.
mamooth,Westwall, you'd kill millions through malaria just so you don't have to admit to being wrong. You're a poster child for the banality of evil. As are so many deniers here. First they lost on the science, then they lost on the politics. Now, seeing no other options for their cult, their thoughts are turning to violence.
Oh, Godwin. Westwall loses.
You mention malaria. But don't forget about ebola. Where for convenience, profits or politically correct ideals, the need for some degree of quarantine is being completely ignored. Though it was nice to see that people in Africa were taking the temperatures of American soldiers as they left their planes there. I don't know what they were expecting to find. But it makes about as much sense as anything else people are doing. Though maybe it was to dispel the magic "ju ju" of thermometers for the locals.
flacaltenn,Sarah G,At least you're getting the correct question finally. It's not whether global warming exists, it's how it was caused.
As I told some of the deniers here before, all the earth's volcanoes put an estimated 200 million tons of CO2 into the biosphere each year. But each year the activities of humans are responsible for releasing an estimated 26.8 billion tons of CO2. Which the deniers don't like to admit IS a greenhouse gas.
I see after 20 pages you're STILL riffing on that volcanic shit. Boy -- Don't think I've missed a damn thing..
Not a word from you about the 700 billions tons of CO2 that mother nature puts up into the atmos every year.. You don't want to learn anything. You're hear to give moving lectures on cultsmashing..
And you accuse me of bringing up the same old crap! The point isn't what the natural carbon cycles are. The point is what humans are doing to upset the balance. As far as I can tell, the ever increasing amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is due to the activities of humans. It may be small compared to what nature does. But it is having quite an effect. And with China alone starting a new coal fired electric power plant between twice a week or once every ten days, along with other factors, things are likely to get worse. Have I smashed your cult yet?
You guys are so stupid. Malaria has been around in the "cooler areas" for hundreds of years. One of the worst outbreaks of malaria was in Archangel Russia back in the 1930s when thousands died. Or how about that hot bed of "tropical" malaria Whitehall! Where Cromwell died of the disease way back in 1658.
Historical reality shows your assertions to be ridiculous bullshit.
You guys are so stupid. Malaria has been around in the "cooler areas" for hundreds of years. One of the worst outbreaks of malaria was in Archangel Russia back in the 1930s when thousands died. Or how about that hot bed of "tropical" malaria Whitehall! Where Cromwell died of the disease way back in 1658.
Historical reality shows your assertions to be ridiculous bullshit.
If I had ever made an assertion that malaria was solely a tropical disease, that would indeed be a devastating riposte.
However, since I've never said or implied any such thing, you would just appear to be making crap up about me again. It's a habit you have.
You guys are so stupid. Malaria has been around in the "cooler areas" for hundreds of years. One of the worst outbreaks of malaria was in Archangel Russia back in the 1930s when thousands died. Or how about that hot bed of "tropical" malaria Whitehall! Where Cromwell died of the disease way back in 1658.
Historical reality shows your assertions to be ridiculous bullshit.
If I had ever made an assertion that malaria was solely a tropical disease, that would indeed be a devastating riposte.
However, since I've never said or implied any such thing, you would just appear to be making crap up about me again. It's a habit you have.
They originated from a coloring book, credible science is not a colored drawing.flacaltenn,You can tell yourself that all you want, but it isn't going to make it true.
Your ignorance amuses me.
Go to IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and read FAR, SAR, TAR, AR4 and AR5. If you're hungry for more, read the many thousands of peer reviewed scientific studies on which those assessment reports are based.
When you have a case that can top all that evidence, come back and let us know.
Sure...great source even more sure that humans are altering the global climate based on failing models and the fact that the climate isn't cooperating with the failed hypothesis. When the models don't match the observation..then the observation must be wrong and must be "adjusted". Climate science is a joke.
If you want to convince us to reject over 13,000 peer reviewed studies and the thousands of scientists' work that have gone in to the IPCC's assessment reports, you need one HELL of a lot better argument than that.
Why don't we take them one at time? Wanna start with your favorite "the oceans ate my warming" study from BTK ? Where the T-guy Trenberth FAILED to include that surface warming from ocean absorption of heat in his PREVIOUSLY famous misnamed paper Heat Energy Diagram?
And NOW realizes that he missed one of largest variables in the Heat balance analysis -- but got the right answer anyway??
Please --- let's do that one again.. Then we can tackle the other 12,999.
Maybe this time you'll have an explanation for how the heat left the ocean surface just in time to create the "pause"..
You got nothing.. BTK has nothing.. It's all over except for the lecture from the 21st century Hitler Youth Squad who's here to back you up...
More denier crap. Does you belief that scientists are part of some conspiracy help you sleep at night? Tell me, what papers did these graphs originate from:
View attachment 32767 View attachment 32768
I would love to see some proof...the problem is that there is none.
Again, you need to learn the difference between causation and correlation.
There is no proof that CO2 can cause warming in an open atmosphere.
You believe manmade warming is a fact, but in truth it isn't...it is a hypothesis, and the hypothesis just keeps on failing.
I would love to see some proof...the problem is that there is none.
You have things you believe: you believe the Earth has stopped warming. You believe increasing CO2 will not cause temperatures to increase. You believe the oceans are not rising. You believe neither Antartica nor Greenland are melting into the sea. Where is YOUR proof?
Your demand for proof just shows us ONCE AGAIN, that you do not understand the BASICS of natural science. There will BE NO PROOF...FOR EITHER SIDE. There will only be evidence. Get used to it. And get used to failing because you HAVE none.
Again, you need to learn the difference between causation and correlation.
What you really mean is that the world's scientists need to learn the difference, because they're the ones you believe wrong. And, you know, I could be wrong, but I suspect they DO understand the difference and do so one hell of a lot better than you do. For instance, you would like to reject ALL correlations we find, but did it ever occur to you that while not all correlation are cause-effect relationships, all cause-effect relationships will show a correlation? It would seem that the idea never came to you.
There is no proof that CO2 can cause warming in an open atmosphere.
There is proof that CO2 absorbs IR, whether in the atmosphere or a test tube. There is evidence that it has warmed the Earth sufficient to convince more than 99% of the scientists and scientifically educated people on the plant for over a century. When you reject the greenhouse effect, the only thing you do is announce your stupidity.
You believe manmade warming is a fact, but in truth it isn't...it is a hypothesis, and the hypothesis just keeps on failing.
You stay in your closet and keep telling yourself that. That rest of the human race will stay out here and continue to work based on reality as it is, not as someone might want it to be.
