CDZ Is the Climate changing?

[otto105]

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You're full of shit. Prove it.

The Causes of Climate Change

 

[otto105]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

 

[Leo123]

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You're full of shit. Prove it.

The Causes of Climate Change

I see you ascribe to the propaganda. NASA knows squat about climate change. They are a space agency you fool.

 

[Leo123]

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

So, how much do YOU contribute to global warming? Perhaps you should stop breathing.

 

[otto105]

Climatechange is what them there scientificals call a 'constant"

No, no they don't.

The Dust Bowl brought ecological, economical and human misery to America during a time when it was already suffering under the Great Depression. While the economic decline caused by the Great Depression played a role, it was hardly the only guilty party. What circumstances conspired to cause the Dust Bowl? Economic depression coupled with extended drought, unusually high temperatures, poor agricultural practices and the resulting wind erosion all contributed to making the Dust Bowl.

The seeds of the Dust Bowl may have been sowed during the early 1920s. A post-World War I recession led farmers to try new mechanized farming techniques as a way to increase profits. Many bought plows and other farming equipment, and between 1925 and 1930 more than 5 million acres of previously unfarmed land was plowed [source: CSA]. With the help of mechanized farming, farmers produced record crops during the 1931 season. However, overproduction of wheat coupled with the Great Depression led to severely reduced market prices. The wheat market was flooded, and people were too poor to buy. Farmers were unable to earn back their production costs and expanded their fields in an effort to turn a profit -- they covered with wheat in place of the natural drought-resistant grasses and left any unused fields bare.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

Liar no one knows....

 

[otto105]

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You're full of shit. Prove it.

The Causes of Climate Change

I see you ascribe to the propaganda. NASA knows squat about climate change. They are a space agency you fool.

Take that up with them.

Still looking for that one scientific organization?

 

[otto105]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

Liar no one knows....

Yes, yes people do know.

Now you're just being stupid.

 

[Leo123]

Climatechange is what them there scientificals call a 'constant"

No, no they don't.

The Dust Bowl brought ecological, economical and human misery to America during a time when it was already suffering under the Great Depression. While the economic decline caused by the Great Depression played a role, it was hardly the only guilty party. What circumstances conspired to cause the Dust Bowl? Economic depression coupled with extended drought, unusually high temperatures, poor agricultural practices and the resulting wind erosion all contributed to making the Dust Bowl.

The seeds of the Dust Bowl may have been sowed during the early 1920s. A post-World War I recession led farmers to try new mechanized farming techniques as a way to increase profits. Many bought plows and other farming equipment, and between 1925 and 1930 more than 5 million acres of previously unfarmed land was plowed [source: CSA]. With the help of mechanized farming, farmers produced record crops during the 1931 season. However, overproduction of wheat coupled with the Great Depression led to severely reduced market prices. The wheat market was flooded, and people were too poor to buy. Farmers were unable to earn back their production costs and expanded their fields in an effort to turn a profit -- they covered with wheat in place of the natural drought-resistant grasses and left any unused fields bare.

You're an idiot. The Dust Bowl was not a global phenomenom.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

Liar no one knows....

Yes, yes people do know.

Now you're just being stupid.

You can't measure it

 

[otto105]

Climatechange is what them there scientificals call a 'constant"

No, no they don't.

The Dust Bowl brought ecological, economical and human misery to America during a time when it was already suffering under the Great Depression. While the economic decline caused by the Great Depression played a role, it was hardly the only guilty party. What circumstances conspired to cause the Dust Bowl? Economic depression coupled with extended drought, unusually high temperatures, poor agricultural practices and the resulting wind erosion all contributed to making the Dust Bowl.

The seeds of the Dust Bowl may have been sowed during the early 1920s. A post-World War I recession led farmers to try new mechanized farming techniques as a way to increase profits. Many bought plows and other farming equipment, and between 1925 and 1930 more than 5 million acres of previously unfarmed land was plowed [source: CSA]. With the help of mechanized farming, farmers produced record crops during the 1931 season. However, overproduction of wheat coupled with the Great Depression led to severely reduced market prices. The wheat market was flooded, and people were too poor to buy. Farmers were unable to earn back their production costs and expanded their fields in an effort to turn a profit -- they covered with wheat in place of the natural drought-resistant grasses and left any unused fields bare.

You're an idiot. The Dust Bowl was not a global phenomenom.

Never stated that it was. It was largely man-made.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Climatechange is what them there scientificals call a 'constant"

No, no they don't.

The Dust Bowl brought ecological, economical and human misery to America during a time when it was already suffering under the Great Depression. While the economic decline caused by the Great Depression played a role, it was hardly the only guilty party. What circumstances conspired to cause the Dust Bowl? Economic depression coupled with extended drought, unusually high temperatures, poor agricultural practices and the resulting wind erosion all contributed to making the Dust Bowl.

The seeds of the Dust Bowl may have been sowed during the early 1920s. A post-World War I recession led farmers to try new mechanized farming techniques as a way to increase profits. Many bought plows and other farming equipment, and between 1925 and 1930 more than 5 million acres of previously unfarmed land was plowed [source: CSA]. With the help of mechanized farming, farmers produced record crops during the 1931 season. However, overproduction of wheat coupled with the Great Depression led to severely reduced market prices. The wheat market was flooded, and people were too poor to buy. Farmers were unable to earn back their production costs and expanded their fields in an effort to turn a profit -- they covered with wheat in place of the natural drought-resistant grasses and left any unused fields bare.

You're an idiot. The Dust Bowl was not a global phenomenom.

Never stated that it was. It was largely man-made.

Prove it..

 

[otto105]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

Liar no one knows....

Yes, yes people do know.

Now you're just being stupid.

You can't measure it

Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She was a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee, published over a hundred scientific papers, and co-edited several major works. Curry retired from academia in 2017 at age 63.[2]

Curry has become known as a contrarian scientist hosting a blog which is part of the climate change denial blogosphere.

Social scientists who have studied Curry's position on climate change have described it as "neo-skepticism", in that her current position includes certain features of denialism: she accepts that the planet is warming, that human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide cause warming, and that the plausible worst-case scenario is potentially catastrophic, but she also proposes that the rate of warming is slower than climate models have projected, emphasizes her evaluation of the uncertainty in the climate prediction models, and questions whether climate change mitigation is affordable. Despite the broad consensus among climate scientists that climate change requires urgent action, Curry has testified to the United States Congress that, in her opinion, there is so much uncertainty about natural climate variation that trying to reduce emissions may be pointless.

No, judy, there is not much uncertainty.

 

[otto105]

judy just wants to make some money on this uncertainty that she pushes....

Judith Curry, one of climate science's most vocal critics, is leaving academe because of what she calls the poisonous nature of the scientific discussion around human-caused global warming.

Curry, 63, is retiring from her tenured position as a professor at the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She's instead going to focus on growing her private business, Climate Forecast Applications Network, which provides insights into climate and weather risks for agriculture and energy companies.

The climatologist, who distinguished herself in the field decades ago with research into the Arctic and the causes of the climate feedback that have shaped the region, writes a blog called Climate Etc. It is by turns academic and inflammatory.

There she occasionally mocks what she calls "climate alarmists" who say time is almost out unless humanity weans itself off fossil fuels. In her blog and on Twitter, she has also criticized some of the scientists, including Pennsylvania State University climatologist Michael Mann and Harvard University climate historian Naomi Oreskes, who have become leading voices for climate action. She has testified in front of Congress, boosted by politicians who use her work to argue that environmental regulations and a scaling down of fossil fuel use will be ineffective. Her work is frequently invoked by climate skeptics and denialists. Congressional Democrats, displeased with her conclusions, have investigated the source of her funding.


Curry actually believes, along with the vast majority of climate scientists, that humans are warming the planet, and was even an outspoken advocate of the issue during the George W. Bush years. She was among the first to connect global warming to hurricanes, for example, publishing an influential study in Science in 2006. But where she breaks with the majority opinion is over just how much humans are actually causing global temperatures to rise.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

Liar no one knows....

Yes, yes people do know.

Now you're just being stupid.

You can't measure it

Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She was a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee, published over a hundred scientific papers, and co-edited several major works. Curry retired from academia in 2017 at age 63.[2]

Curry has become known as a contrarian scientist hosting a blog which is part of the climate change denial blogosphere.

Social scientists who have studied Curry's position on climate change have described it as "neo-skepticism", in that her current position includes certain features of denialism: she accepts that the planet is warming, that human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide cause warming, and that the plausible worst-case scenario is potentially catastrophic, but she also proposes that the rate of warming is slower than climate models have projected, emphasizes her evaluation of the uncertainty in the climate prediction models, and questions whether climate change mitigation is affordable. Despite the broad consensus among climate scientists that climate change requires urgent action, Curry has testified to the United States Congress that, in her opinion, there is so much uncertainty about natural climate variation that trying to reduce emissions may be pointless.

No, judy, there is not much uncertainty.

So you are smarter then her and has been peer reviewed, attended congress debates..



Prove it

 

[Wyatt earp]

judy just wants to make some money on this uncertainty that she pushes....

Judith Curry, one of climate science's most vocal critics, is leaving academe because of what she calls the poisonous nature of the scientific discussion around human-caused global warming.

Curry, 63, is retiring from her tenured position as a professor at the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She's instead going to focus on growing her private business, Climate Forecast Applications Network, which provides insights into climate and weather risks for agriculture and energy companies.

The climatologist, who distinguished herself in the field decades ago with research into the Arctic and the causes of the climate feedback that have shaped the region, writes a blog called Climate Etc. It is by turns academic and inflammatory.

There she occasionally mocks what she calls "climate alarmists" who say time is almost out unless humanity weans itself off fossil fuels. In her blog and on Twitter, she has also criticized some of the scientists, including Pennsylvania State University climatologist Michael Mann and Harvard University climate historian Naomi Oreskes, who have become leading voices for climate action. She has testified in front of Congress, boosted by politicians who use her work to argue that environmental regulations and a scaling down of fossil fuel use will be ineffective. Her work is frequently invoked by climate skeptics and denialists. Congressional Democrats, displeased with her conclusions, have investigated the source of her funding.


Curry actually believes, along with the vast majority of climate scientists, that humans are warming the planet, and was even an outspoken advocate of the issue during the George W. Bush years. She was among the first to connect global warming to hurricanes, for example, publishing an influential study in Science in 2006. But where she breaks with the majority opinion is over just how much humans are actually causing global temperatures to rise.

Once again no one knows how much is man made and how much is a natural variance

 

[otto105]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

Liar no one knows....

Yes, yes people do know.

Now you're just being stupid.

You can't measure it

Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She was a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee, published over a hundred scientific papers, and co-edited several major works. Curry retired from academia in 2017 at age 63.[2]

Curry has become known as a contrarian scientist hosting a blog which is part of the climate change denial blogosphere.

Social scientists who have studied Curry's position on climate change have described it as "neo-skepticism", in that her current position includes certain features of denialism: she accepts that the planet is warming, that human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide cause warming, and that the plausible worst-case scenario is potentially catastrophic, but she also proposes that the rate of warming is slower than climate models have projected, emphasizes her evaluation of the uncertainty in the climate prediction models, and questions whether climate change mitigation is affordable. Despite the broad consensus among climate scientists that climate change requires urgent action, Curry has testified to the United States Congress that, in her opinion, there is so much uncertainty about natural climate variation that trying to reduce emissions may be pointless.

No, judy, there is not much uncertainty.

So you are smarter then her and has been peer reviewed, attended congress debates..



Prove it

Curry, 63, is retiring from her tenured position as a professor at the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She's instead going to focus on growing her private business, Climate Forecast Applications Network, which provides insights into climate and weather risks for agriculture and energy companies.


Uncertainty is on her business card.

 

[Leo123]

Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She was a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee, published over a hundred scientific papers, and co-edited several major works. Curry retired from academia in 2017 at age 63.[2]

Curry has become known as a contrarian scientist hosting a blog which is part of the climate change denial blogosphere.

Social scientists who have studied Curry's position on climate change have described it as "neo-skepticism", in that her current position includes certain features of denialism: she accepts that the planet is warming, that human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide cause warming, and that the plausible worst-case scenario is potentially catastrophic, but she also proposes that the rate of warming is slower than climate models have projected, emphasizes her evaluation of the uncertainty in the climate prediction models, and questions whether climate change mitigation is affordable. Despite the broad consensus among climate scientists that climate change requires urgent action, Curry has testified to the United States Congress that, in her opinion, there is so much uncertainty about natural climate variation that trying to reduce emissions may be pointless.

No, judy, there is not much uncertainty.

Social scientists?? There is 0 scientific proof that humans are causing global warming, idiot.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Is the Climate changing?​

LITTLE KNOWN FACT: the climate has been changing for 4.4 billion years. It is now moving back to the warmer climate it was for millions of years from the colder one is has been, before it makes its next steep plummet towards the next Holocene Ice Age.

The previous post was brought to you by a moron.

So you calling scientific facts a mo

Betcha you think the earth is flat

What is your catalyst for the sudden change in climate?

You know, scientifically.

We don't know, how much is man made and natural variance

Yes, yes we do. We account for 99% of it.

Now can you find a scientific organization which will state publicity that it is all natural variance.

You should write a paper you would get a Nobel prize..




Once again no one knows how much man contributes and how much is natural variance

Yes, yes people do know.

You choose not too.

Liar no one knows....

Yes, yes people do know.

Now you're just being stupid.

You can't measure it

Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She was a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee, published over a hundred scientific papers, and co-edited several major works. Curry retired from academia in 2017 at age 63.[2]

Curry has become known as a contrarian scientist hosting a blog which is part of the climate change denial blogosphere.

Social scientists who have studied Curry's position on climate change have described it as "neo-skepticism", in that her current position includes certain features of denialism: she accepts that the planet is warming, that human-generated greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide cause warming, and that the plausible worst-case scenario is potentially catastrophic, but she also proposes that the rate of warming is slower than climate models have projected, emphasizes her evaluation of the uncertainty in the climate prediction models, and questions whether climate change mitigation is affordable. Despite the broad consensus among climate scientists that climate change requires urgent action, Curry has testified to the United States Congress that, in her opinion, there is so much uncertainty about natural climate variation that trying to reduce emissions may be pointless.

No, judy, there is not much uncertainty.

So you are smarter then her and has been peer reviewed, attended congress debates..



Prove it

Curry, 63, is retiring from her tenured position as a professor at the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She's instead going to focus on growing her private business, Climate Forecast Applications Network, which provides insights into climate and weather risks for agriculture and energy companies.


Uncertainty is on her business card.

Still cant prove it's man made?



Still can't prove to us your peer reviewed paper on this?


Still can't prove you were invited to congress to testify?

 

[skye]

Climate has been changing since the dawn of time.

There is nothing new about that....that's how it is and it has been forever.

Only thing new, is that people living today are total morons, apart from that, it's all the same since the beginning of time.