Is it "Climate Change" Consensus or "Global Warming" Consensus

[Huston713]

For the past year or so I have heard the WH and the MSM say that a consensus or 97% of scientists agree that it is man that is causing either global warming or climate change. My question is which one is it (climate change or global warming) and how do we arrive at this consensus? My research into this comes up with no particular study that is irrefutable. Yet I hear that the science is proven....

 

[Pete7469]

Cue regresssive parrots in...

3...

2...

1...

 

[Crick]

For the past year or so I have heard the WH and the MSM say that a consensus or 97% of scientists agree that it is man that is causing either global warming or climate change. My question is which one is it (climate change or global warming) and how do we arrive at this consensus? My research into this comes up with no particular study that is irrefutable. Yet I hear that the science is proven....

Wikipedia has two different articles discussing surveys, polls and studies: Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia and Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia.

That the vast majority of climate scientists accept the IPCC conclusion does not "prove the science". There are no proofs in the natural sciences. The majority of scientists accept that AGW is the most likely theory to be correct based on the results of thousands of studies that have been performed over the last several decades.

 

[SSDD]

There is little doubt that the climate is changing....I doubt that anyone will argue that point...but there is not the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that mankind is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions...there is no detectable human fingerprint in the climate...

 

[gipper]

There is little doubt that the climate is changing....I doubt that anyone will argue that point...but there is not the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that mankind is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions...there is no detectable human fingerprint in the climate...

but...but...but....like....like...like....all that like...all that man made pollution must be causing Mother Earth to warm...

This is the essence of the warmer's scientific conclusion. To fix this awful world ending problem, we need big unlimited government run by a very small criminal elite. (most ironic and transparent)

 

[SSDD]

There is little doubt that the climate is changing....I doubt that anyone will argue that point...but there is not the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that mankind is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions...there is no detectable human fingerprint in the climate...

but...but...but....like....like...like....all that like...all that man made pollution must be causing Mother Earth to warm...

This is the essence of the warmer's scientific conclusion. To fix this awful world ending problem, we need big unlimited government run by a very small criminal elite. (most ironic and transparent)

You know...for all the thousands of millions of dollars that have been flushed down the toilet on climate change...I have yet to see a single paper presenting real world solutions to any of the addressable environmental problems we face...

 

[gallantwarrior]

For the past year or so I have heard the WH and the MSM say that a consensus or 97% of scientists agree that it is man that is causing either global warming or climate change. My question is which one is it (climate change or global warming) and how do we arrive at this consensus? My research into this comes up with no particular study that is irrefutable. Yet I hear that the science is proven....

Wikipedia has two different articles discussing surveys, polls and studies: Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia and Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia.

That the vast majority of climate scientists accept the IPCC conclusion does not "prove the science". There are no proofs in the natural sciences. The majority of scientists accept that AGW is the most likely theory to be correct based on the results of thousands of studies that have been performed over the last several decades.

FACT is the AGW crowd has no studies, but they have computer modeling. Like guessing based on past performances. I double dog dare anyone who believes in AGW to bet their entire life savings on the latest Powerball stats.

 

[gallantwarrior]

There is little doubt that the climate is changing....I doubt that anyone will argue that point...but there is not the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that mankind is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions...there is no detectable human fingerprint in the climate...

but...but...but....like....like...like....all that like...all that man made pollution must be causing Mother Earth to warm...

This is the essence of the warmer's scientific conclusion. To fix this awful world ending problem, we need big unlimited government run by a very small criminal elite. (most ironic and transparent)

You know...for all the thousands of millions of dollars that have been flushed down the toilet on climate change...I have yet to see a single paper presenting real world solutions to any of the addressable environmental problems we face...

You mean...as in...this is the cause and here's the solution? HOW DARE YOU!!! Faith should dictate your response.

 

[SSDD]

There is little doubt that the climate is changing....I doubt that anyone will argue that point...but there is not the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that mankind is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions...there is no detectable human fingerprint in the climate...

but...but...but....like....like...like....all that like...all that man made pollution must be causing Mother Earth to warm...

This is the essence of the warmer's scientific conclusion. To fix this awful world ending problem, we need big unlimited government run by a very small criminal elite. (most ironic and transparent)

You know...for all the thousands of millions of dollars that have been flushed down the toilet on climate change...I have yet to see a single paper presenting real world solutions to any of the addressable environmental problems we face...

You mean...as in...this is the cause and here's the solution? HOW DARE YOU!!! Faith should dictate your response.

Sorry guy...I am a pragmatist....its the inevitable result of all that critical thinking.

 

[Crick]

The claim that those accepting AGW are looking for "big unlimited government" is an unsupportable lie. What they are looking for is an informed populace that will accept mainstream science and make long term commitments to deal with the threat that AGW creates.

PS, you, SSDD, are the absolute paragon of uncritical thinking.

 

[miketx]

We should regulate cow emissions.

 

[Crick]

Is that a Trump position?

 

[miketx]

Is that a Trump position?

No, it's what the imbeciles in dumbfuckistan are doing.

 

[Crick]

I think it's an irrelevant red herring. We need to work on reducing CO2 emissions in transportation and energy technology.

 

[Old Rocks]

For the past year or so I have heard the WH and the MSM say that a consensus or 97% of scientists agree that it is man that is causing either global warming or climate change. My question is which one is it (climate change or global warming) and how do we arrive at this consensus? My research into this comes up with no particular study that is irrefutable. Yet I hear that the science is proven....

Wikipedia has two different articles discussing surveys, polls and studies: Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia and Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia.

That the vast majority of climate scientists accept the IPCC conclusion does not "prove the science". There are no proofs in the natural sciences. The majority of scientists accept that AGW is the most likely theory to be correct based on the results of thousands of studies that have been performed over the last several decades.

FACT is the AGW crowd has no studies, but they have computer modeling. Like guessing based on past performances. I double dog dare anyone who believes in AGW to bet their entire life savings on the latest Powerball stats.

How wonderfully fucking stupid your whole post sounds. You obviously have not done the slightest research concerning AGW.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

That is an American Institute of Physics site. The AIP is simply the largest scientific society in the world. And there are thousands of studies of the effects, observed, not models, of the present warming. That you don't know that just shows that you are an ignorant shit that flaps your yap with zero to back up your stupid words.

 

[Old Rocks]

There is little doubt that the climate is changing....I doubt that anyone will argue that point...but there is not the first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the claim that mankind is altering the global climate with his CO2 emissions...there is no detectable human fingerprint in the climate...

but...but...but....like....like...like....all that like...all that man made pollution must be causing Mother Earth to warm...

This is the essence of the warmer's scientific conclusion. To fix this awful world ending problem, we need big unlimited government run by a very small criminal elite. (most ironic and transparent)

You know...for all the thousands of millions of dollars that have been flushed down the toilet on climate change...I have yet to see a single paper presenting real world solutions to any of the addressable environmental problems we face...

You mean...as in...this is the cause and here's the solution? HOW DARE YOU!!! Faith should dictate your response.

Sorry guy...I am a pragmatist....its the inevitable result of all that critical thinking.

LOL You are an idiot that believes in smart photons. LOL

 

[Old Rocks]

We should regulate cow emissions.

Spoken like the absolute idiot you are.

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements that state AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. So, who do we listen to, a willfully ignorant fool like Mike, or the scientists that are studying the problem?

 

[SSDD]

The claim that those accepting AGW are looking for "big unlimited government" is an unsupportable lie.

Of course it isn't....again...if you had the capacity for critical thinking rather than being a born follower you might see the lie that you are part of.

What they are looking for is an informed populace that will accept mainstream science and make long term commitments to deal with the threat that AGW creates.[/quote]

Still waiting for that first shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the AGW hypothesis...and I will continue to wait because none exists and never will.

 

[SSDD]

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
.

And the wait continues for you to point to a single thing in that bit of dogma that you think represents anything like actual evidence supporting the AGW hypothesis...whats the matter rocks...afraid that if you actually brought something from that steaming pile that passes for evidence in your mind you would be laughed off the board?

 

[SSDD]

LOL You are an idiot that believes in smart photons. LOL

You are the idiot that thinks that intelligence is required in order to obey the laws of physics. Appeal to ridicule rather than present an actual argument...just another logical fallacy from someone who has nothing but logical fallacy in his arsenal.