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.
You should be flattered. Must be some reason for you to keep ignoring / denying all the facts . At least that one fits without necessarily involving stupidity. Carelessness and greed, sure, but..I am getting Koch money>. Really?
Let us know when you post observed empirical factsYou should be flattered. Must be some reason for you to keep ignoring / denying all the facts . At least that one fits without necessarily involving stupidity. Carelessness and greed, sure, but..I am getting Koch money>. Really?
In reality, you're entitled to express your opinions, not your own facts. Endless stupid assertions, deliberate conflations, misrepresentations..
You funny, but looks only get one so far.
Sure. Lucky you. Just your speed!Let us know when you post observed empirical facts
Which āfactsā would that be. The only piece of actual science you posted so far supported my position that CO2 trails temperature increase.. The rest have been opinion pieces. Guess i see why you would restrict yourself to that sort of information...i mean...your graph reading skills leav much to be desired and that is the easiest part of reading real science.You should be flattered. Must be some reason for you to keep ignoring / denying all the facts . At least that one fits without necessarily involving stupidity. Carelessness and greed, sure, but..I am getting Koch money>. Really?
In reality, you're entitled to express your opinions, not your own facts. Endless stupid assertions, deliberate conflations, misrepresentations..
You funny, but looks only get one so far.
A little hypocrisy eh? You are denigrating Foote's 19'th century experiment as quaint, but cite other 19th century physicists as experts.Fourier, whose hypothesis was demonstrated to be fatally flawed by professor Woods and his experiment very shortly after it was published. He media invariably fails to note that fact.
Tyndall, who also noted that CO2 was the most feeble of the IR absorbing gasses.
If you have any scientific ability at all, you know that Foote demonstrated that water vapor warms more efficiently than dry gasses...big surprise.
And Savante Arrhenius...what was he known for again? Hats right..he was a chemist who theorized a radiative greenhouse effect. What your sources fail to mention is that no less than James C. Maxwell, one of the biggest of the big dogs didnāt think much of Savanteās hypothesis. And then there was Clausius, ever hear of him? He practically invented the science of thermodynamics, which oddly enough deals with Savanteās hypothesis...he didnāt think much of the idea of a radiative greenhouse effect either.
Donāt you find it interesting that in an effort to demonstrate the science of a radiative greenhouse effect, you m use resort to quaint 19th century science
You just canāt get anymore special than this from your own link;Sure. Lucky you. Just your speed!Let us know when you post observed empirical facts
Yep, this pack of turds is truly shameless.A little hypocrisy eh? You are denigrating Foote's 19'th century experiment as quaint, but cite other 19th century physicists as experts.
You are lying about Foote's experiment and Tyndall's results by omitting what they really concluded. Shame on you.
No self-reflection. Denial and attempted reversal is all they offer. No counter theory. See nothing. Hear nothing. What global warming? What record increases in temperature, thunderstorms, rainfall, drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, flooding, sea level rise, melting glaciers? Oh, that's not global warming. Oh, that was just a natural variation. A local weather change. Nothing to indicate a change in global climate... and blah, blah, blah!Ever notice how when you get asked tough questions about claims you have made that you cant back up with evidence, you fall back to what you are good at...ie namecalling, logical fallacy, and opinion.
Oh, let me guess. "Special" because you can't either so would never even try. But, boy can you deny!You just canāt get anymore special than this from your own link;
āWe can't take Earth's temperature directly, but we do have a lot of information from weather stations, ocean buoys and remote sensing instruments. The information lets us see changes in climate. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltechā
You present nothing but hearsay, opinion, and flat out lies. When given direct questions you him and haw using the Saul Alinsky principals of deflection, name calling and professional degradation. You present no facts and when questioned NEVER answer the questions.Yep, this pack of turds is truly shameless.A little hypocrisy eh? You are denigrating Foote's 19'th century experiment as quaint, but cite other 19th century physicists as experts.
You are lying about Foote's experiment and Tyndall's results by omitting what they really concluded. Shame on you.
No self-reflection. Denial and attempted reversal is all they offer. No counter theory. See nothing. Hear nothing. What global warming? What record increases in temperature, thunderstorms, rainfall, drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, flooding, sea level rise, melting glaciers? Oh, that's not global warming. Oh, that was just a natural variation. A local weather change. Nothing to indicate a change in global climate... and blah, blah, blah!Ever notice how when you get asked tough questions about claims you have made that you cant back up with evidence, you fall back to what you are good at...ie namecalling, logical fallacy, and opinion.
Gee, you sound angry! Good! Now you know how the rest of the world feels reading your crap. Here's your sale:You present nothing but hearsay, opinion, and flat out lies.
Gee, you sound angry! Good! Now you know how the rest of the world feels reading your crap. Here's your sale:You present nothing but hearsay, opinion, and flat out lies.
I canāt either what? You provided a link that admits temperatures canāt be observed! On an ask from me for observed empirical data! PwnedOh, let me guess. "Special" because you can't either so would never even try. But, boy can you deny!You just canāt get anymore special than this from your own link;
āWe can't take Earth's temperature directly, but we do have a lot of information from weather stations, ocean buoys and remote sensing instruments. The information lets us see changes in climate. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltechā
In every instance these are lies.What global warming? What record increases in temperature, thunderstorms, rainfall, drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, flooding, sea level rise, melting glaciers?
Weather is weatherYep, this pack of turds is truly shameless.A little hypocrisy eh? You are denigrating Foote's 19'th century experiment as quaint, but cite other 19th century physicists as experts.
You are lying about Foote's experiment and Tyndall's results by omitting what they really concluded. Shame on you.
No self-reflection. Denial and attempted reversal is all they offer. No counter theory. See nothing. Hear nothing. What global warming? What record increases in temperature, thunderstorms, rainfall, drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, flooding, sea level rise, melting glaciers? Oh, that's not global warming. Oh, that was just a natural variation. A local weather change. Nothing to indicate a change in global climate... and blah, blah, blah!Ever notice how when you get asked tough questions about claims you have made that you cant back up with evidence, you fall back to what you are good at...ie namecalling, logical fallacy, and opinion.
]
A little hypocrisy eh? You are denigrating Foote's 19'th century experiment as quaint, but cite other 19th century physicists as experts.
You are lying about Foote's experiment and Tyndall's results by omitting what they really concluded. Shame on you..
Yep, this pack of turds is truly shameless.
No self-reflection. Denial and attempted reversal is all they offer
No counter theory.
See nothing. Hear nothing. What global warming
What record increases in temperature, thunderstorms, rainfall, drought, hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, flooding, sea level rise, melting glaciers?
Oh, that's not global warming. Oh, that was just a natural variation. A local weather change. Nothing to indicate a change in global climate... and blah, blah, blah!
Gee, you sound angry! Good! Now you know how the rest of the world feels reading your crap. Here's your sale:You present nothing but hearsay, opinion, and flat out lies.
Not angry, just showing others that you are not to be trusted and that your opinions mean squat...
View attachment 264861
Still with hypocrisy eh?Merely pointing out that far mor respected men of the time didnāt think much of the idea of a radiative greenhouse effect...and the science hasnāt advanced much sine...of course you can only travel so far on a dead end road...which is why you guys must refer to quaint 19th century science fair level experiments when you are asked for any
You were wrong then and you are still wrong. Foote demonstrated that CO2 absorption of IR raises the temperature. Shame on you for lying to Grumble, but lying is your game, isn't it.Been through it all before...sorry you are so easily fooled, or so desperate that you must lie...shame on you for suggesting to someone like grumble that there actually is some real science that supports the AGW hypothesis. Typical...
What aspects of modern physics do you find arguable? Or maybe a digression like that belongs in the Science and Technology forum.Somewhat ironic in this case though in that I'd also likely argue with you about many aspects of modern physics.
