No Evidence

[jc456]

All that and not a single piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....

54,195 published papers and not a single one in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and ascribed to so called greenhouse gasses....what a colossal, expensive, pointless waste of time climate science has been...

That's the problem I have. All these "scientists" say the Earth is warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. They can't explain 4.4 billion years of climate change before man ever stepped foot on this planet. If AGW is only responsible for the last 50 years, what's responsible for the previous 4.4 billion that is NO LONGER a factor in our climate today? What changed, scientifically, that the Earth warming is now solely because of man and not what caused it to warm and cool for the past 4 BILLION years? 50 million years ago was the thermal max this planet ever experienced. That was 49.99 MILLION years before man. So what caused it then that absolutely CANNOT be the cause today?

They have no explanation for this:

Or maybe they are claiming that man made global warming looks just like natural variability...that makes as much sense as anything else they say.

for me, it is as simple as that no one can say what the temperature is supposed to be. Where's the script that says, that at 400 ppm of CO2 temperatures should be x, y, z or here is observed readings of pressure that create severe storms and it takes x, y, z of CO2 to cause one % pressure increase. Where are the actual scientists? We do know that once the arctic was ice free before man. We know Greenland was green.

Personally, besides the four seasons seasonal changes, I don't see any evidence of climate change since I've been alive. Arctic still has Ice as does the antarctic. The Amazon is still hot. Africa still has deserts. so I challenged individuals a few years back to show where climate has changed. Still today, zip, zero.

Death valley is still death valley.

No greenhouse gases sending IR back to the surface. Still unobserved.

4 degrees today in chicago. In late february. Average is 36.

 

[airplanemechanic]

All that and not a single piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....

54,195 published papers and not a single one in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and ascribed to so called greenhouse gasses....what a colossal, expensive, pointless waste of time climate science has been...

That's the problem I have. All these "scientists" say the Earth is warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. They can't explain 4.4 billion years of climate change before man ever stepped foot on this planet. If AGW is only responsible for the last 50 years, what's responsible for the previous 4.4 billion that is NO LONGER a factor in our climate today? What changed, scientifically, that the Earth warming is now solely because of man and not what caused it to warm and cool for the past 4 BILLION years? 50 million years ago was the thermal max this planet ever experienced. That was 49.99 MILLION years before man. So what caused it then that absolutely CANNOT be the cause today?

They have no explanation for this:

Or maybe they are claiming that man made global warming looks just like natural variability...that makes as much sense as anything else they say.

for me, it is as simple as that no one can say what the temperature is supposed to be. Where's the script that says, that at 400 ppm of CO2 temperatures should be x, y, z or here is observed readings of pressure that create severe storms and it takes x, y, z of CO2 to cause one % pressure increase. Where are the actual scientists? We do know that once the arctic was ice free before man. We know Greenland was green.

Personally, besides the four seasons seasonal changes, I don't see any evidence of climate change since I've been alive. Arctic still has Ice as does the antarctic. The Amazon is still hot. Africa still has deserts. so I challenged individuals a few years back to show where climate has changed. Still today, zip, zero.

Death valley is still death valley.

No greenhouse gases sending IR back to the surface. Still unobserved.

4 degrees today in chicago. In late february. Average is 36.

You just don't get it. AGW is causing the polar vortex to plummet south causing record cold temps.

This explanation can help AGW worshippers explain away record cold. I mean hell, if its hot its AGW if its cold its AGW. It's a win win!!

 

[Crick]

There is no need to "explain away" anything as it is, in fact, the cause of the polar vortex shifting south.

 

[jc456]

There is no need to "explain away" anything as it is, in fact, the cause of the polar vortex shifting south.

nothing to do with CO2. just like warming has nothing to do with CO2, it's called climate.

 

[Crick]

All that and not a single piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....

54,195 published papers and not a single one in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and ascribed to so called greenhouse gasses....what a colossal, expensive, pointless waste of time climate science has been...

God are you a stupid TROLL

How many folks here believe that over 54,000 published climate science studies contain no observations? No measurements? No evidence? Does anyone here actually think SSDD has a BASIS for the statement he just made? Has he reviewed all those papers? Has reviewed even one percent of them? So where does he get this stuff?

He makes it up because SSDD is a fucking TROLL

 

[jc456]

All that and not a single piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....

54,195 published papers and not a single one in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and ascribed to so called greenhouse gasses....what a colossal, expensive, pointless waste of time climate science has been...

God are you a stupid TROLL

How many folks here believe that over 54,000 published climate science studies contain no observations? No measurements? No evidence? Does anyone here actually think SSDD has a BASIS for the statement he just made? Has he reviewed all those papers? Has reviewed even one percent of them? So where does he get this stuff?

He makes it up because SSDD is a fucking TROLL

well fk toto, one would think out of a fking 54,000 published studies, you could post one that proves your point. the mere fact that you don't proves you the loser. not one observed measured study. not a fking one. if there was, it would have been posted by now. I'm confident of that.

 

[Crick]

If anyone around here is a sock puppet and their master, it is you and SSDD. I'm just not certain which of you brainiacs is actually in charge.

Tens of thousands of scientific studies on our climate published over the last two decades contains mountains of evidence that the planet is warming and that the primary cause is human GHG emissions. The claims of the OP of this thread are absolutely nonsensical lies.

 

[jc456]

If anyone around here is a sock puppet and their master, it is you and SSDD. I'm just not certain which of you brainiacs is actually in charge.

Tens of thousands of scientific studies on our climate published over the last two decades contains mountains of evidence that the planet is warming and that the primary cause is human GHG emissions. The claims of the OP of this thread are absolutely nonsensical lies.

nope!

 

[SSDD]

There is no need to "explain away" anything as it is, in fact, the cause of the polar vortex shifting south.

Sorry skid mark...but it is not a fact...the truth is that the hypothesis doesn't have much support and even NOAA et al say that there is no real correlation between arctic ice melt and fluctuations in the polar vortex...just more bullshit pseudoscience which is good enough to fool you...

 

[SSDD]

All that and not a single piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....

54,195 published papers and not a single one in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and ascribed to so called greenhouse gasses....what a colossal, expensive, pointless waste of time climate science has been...

God are you a stupid TROLL

How many folks here believe that over 54,000 published climate science studies contain no observations? No measurements? No evidence? Does anyone here actually think SSDD has a BASIS for the statement he just made? Has he reviewed all those papers? Has reviewed even one percent of them? So where does he get this stuff?

He makes it up because SSDD is a fucking TROLL

Typical lies....do you ever tell the truth about anything? When did I ever say that there were no observations in those papers? Answer...never...I said that there were no observed, measured data which support the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...

Feel free to prove me wrong skidmark...bring forward an observed, measured piece of data which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...just one..

 

[SSDD]

If anyone around here is a sock puppet and their master, it is you and SSDD. I'm just not certain which of you brainiacs is actually in charge.

Tens of thousands of scientific studies on our climate published over the last two decades contains mountains of evidence that the planet is warming and that the primary cause is human GHG emissions. The claims of the OP of this thread are absolutely nonsensical lies.

Sorry skidmark but that just isn't so...the only "evidence" you can produce which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability is the output of failed climate models...no observed measured data at all supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability..

 

[Crick]

You've disappointed your sock puppet by not recognizing his undying loyalty. He even buys your smart photons.

As to evidence, your claim would be roll-on-the-floor laughable if it weren't so fucking TROLLISH

 

[jc456]

You've disappointed your sock puppet by not recognizing his undying loyalty. He even buys your smart photons.

As to evidence, your claim would be roll-on-the-floor laughable if it weren't so fucking TROLLISH

no quote, no point.

 

[Crick]

Dear JC, please go away and find some children somewhere to play with. You've got a sandbox and swingset out back don't you/. I bet they're fun. Right now, the grown ups want to have grown up conversations.

www.ipcc.ch
The Physical Science Basis

 

[jc456]

Dear JC, please go away and find some children somewhere to play with. You've got a sandbox and swingset out back don't you/. I bet they're fun. Right now, the grown ups want to have grown up conversations.

www.ipcc.ch
The Physical Science Basis

http://www.ipcc what? still nothing pulled that shows man does anything. no observable measured evidence of AGW and not natural variability. AT ALL! so feel free toto to post that material little asswipe!!! BTW, the teeter totter is now available, the kids went in.

 

[jc456]

If anyone around here is a sock puppet and their master, it is you and SSDD. I'm just not certain which of you brainiacs is actually in charge.

Tens of thousands of scientific studies on our climate published over the last two decades contains mountains of evidence that the planet is warming and that the primary cause is human GHG emissions. The claims of the OP of this thread are absolutely nonsensical lies.

well find us one and post it up that shows AGW over natural variability. go ahead, we're waiting.

 

[Crick]

Evidence in great handfuls may be found in the scientific literature. The data, evidence and conclusions of that literature are neatly assessed by the IPCC in "The Physical Science Basis" which may be found at www.ipcc.ch. If you have any difficulty locating it or making your way through the document, do not hesitate to ask.

 

[SSDD]

You've disappointed your sock puppet by not recognizing his undying loyalty. He even buys your smart photons.

As to evidence, your claim would be roll-on-the-floor laughable if it weren't so fucking TROLLISH

Poor skidmark....still stinging? Can't get your panties unwadded?....to bad for you....personally, I am laughing out loud at your stupidity on parade.....need i remind you about all that evidence you don't seem to be able to produce?

And I couldn't help but notice that the senior mod on this board noted your trollish behavior....I never had anyone but a butt whipped sour grapes doofus call me a troll and you have a senior mod pointing out that you are a troll...interesting..very interesting indeed...

 

[SSDD]

Evidence in great handfuls may be found in the scientific literature. The data, evidence and conclusions of that literature are neatly assessed by the IPCC in "The Physical Science Basis" which may be found at www.ipcc.ch. If you have any difficulty locating it or making your way through the document, do not hesitate to ask.

So you keep saying...but you can't bring a single piece of it here...not a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...you are lying when you say it exists and we all know that you are lying...we all know that you would like nothing more than to slap me down with some such evidence...we also know that you can't..you are reduced to mewling and pewling and making claims that we all know you can't back up.....

And I have been asking for decades...none of the other liars like you were able to bring any actual observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over narwal variability either...the claim that you could help if I asked, is just one more lie in a very long and miserable string of lies that you tell here...day after day after day...

 

[jc456]

Evidence in great handfuls may be found in the scientific literature. The data, evidence and conclusions of that literature are neatly assessed by the IPCC in "The Physical Science Basis" which may be found at www.ipcc.ch. If you have any difficulty locating it or making your way through the document, do not hesitate to ask.

yeah, forward to us the part that backs your claim. I didn't see it there.