State of the Climate in 2013

[Old Rocks]

You insulted all of science and deeply insulted any school teacher that ever thought they could show you how to think.

Could you identify the person who told you that AGW insists that all temperature changes in the history of the planet have been caused by changes in atmospheric CO2? Cause they need a good flogging.

The Principle of Uniformitarianism states that what caused the warming and cooling the past is also the most likely agent of that today. And it is the RARE high school teacher who teaches a student HOW to think, they are far more prone to tell them WHAT to think.

For an insult to science you need look no further than the posts of the anti science deniers like you and yours..

Damn. The Principle of Uniformitarianism states that what has caused warming and cooling in the past is likely to cause it today. Sure enough. In the past, it warmed with an increase in CO2, and cooled with a decrease in CO2. Other factors involved, CH4, aerosols from volcanos and the Milankovic Cycles.

So, when there is a rapid increase the the GHGs, by that principle, there will be a rapid increase in temperature. And that is what we are seeing.

Now all too many people take Lyle's principle to be a gaurentee of a slow warming or cooling, but that is hardly the case. For within that principle are inevitable catastrophes, such as impacts and Bretz Floods. Trapp volcanics, and plumes like that in iceland venting poisonous gases. And that principle states that you change to composition of the atmosphere, whether by Trapp volcanics or anthropogenic means, the result is going to be the same.

 

[Old Rocks]

You insulted all of science and deeply insulted any school teacher that ever thought they could show you how to think.

Could you identify the person who told you that AGW insists that all temperature changes in the history of the planet have been caused by changes in atmospheric CO2? Cause they need a good flogging.

Whom are you addressing Crick? Take a good look at all the CO2 charts Faithers trot out all the time. Consider how carefully they have used differing CO2 markers to construct a bogus cause and effect.

Link? To a credible source, please. Obese junkies on the radio are not considered credible.

 

[Old Rocks]

Was watching a science show and they mentioned rather offhandedly, that sulfur releases from volcanoes had a large impact on Middle Age cooling. Interesting they didn't cite a large DECREASE in CO2. Every once in a while they slip up on the big hoax.

Egad, are you that stupid on everything in life? And you sit there posting on an internet board, denigrating scientists. And that irony undoubtedly sailed right past you.

Your inability to understand the implications of other gases is really interesting. This show featured scientists, so there you go. Just where did I insult any of the scientists from the show?

They did not mention a large decrease in CO2 because there was no large decrease in CO2. Sulphate aerosols reflect light and decrease the amount of energy the earth gets from the sun. And there was the matter, also, at that time, of the Maunder Minimum. Anybody with the sligtest knowledge of earth science knows these facts.

 

[itfitzme]

Was watching a science show and they mentioned rather offhandedly, that sulfur releases from volcanoes had a large impact on Middle Age cooling. Interesting they didn't cite a large DECREASE in CO2. Every once in a while they slip up on the big hoax.

Egad, are you that stupid on everything in life? And you sit there posting on an internet board, denigrating scientists. And that irony undoubtedly sailed right past you.

Your inability to understand the implications of other gases is really interesting. This show featured scientists, so there you go. Just where did I insult any of the scientists from the show?

Was there a large decrease in co2?

 

[itfitzme]

You insulted all of science and deeply insulted any school teacher that ever thought they could show you how to think.

Could you identify the person who told you that AGW insists that all temperature changes in the history of the planet have been caused by changes in atmospheric CO2? Cause they need a good flogging.

The Principle of Uniformitarianism states that what caused the warming and cooling the past is also the most likely agent of that today. And it is the RARE high school teacher who teaches a student HOW to think, they are far more prone to tell them WHAT to think.

For an insult to science you need look no further than the posts of the anti science deniers like you and yours..

Wow, how scientific of you. So what is the confidence level that current warming is caused by previous causes? How likely? Or are you sticking to the fuzzy thinking?

 

[itfitzme]

Egad, are you that stupid on everything in life? And you sit there posting on an internet board, denigrating scientists. And that irony undoubtedly sailed right past you.

Your inability to understand the implications of other gases is really interesting. This show featured scientists, so there you go. Just where did I insult any of the scientists from the show?

They did not mention a large decrease in CO2 because there was no large decrease in CO2. Sulphate aerosols reflect light and decrease the amount of energy the earth gets from the sun. And there was the matter, also, at that time, of the Maunder Minimum. Anybody with the sligtest knowledge of earth science knows these facts.

All that's needed is a grasp if logic and it is obvious he has made no point.

The problem is the inability to distinguish between reality and fantacy. "Did" and "didn't" don't register.

 

[Kosh]

Your inability to understand the implications of other gases is really interesting. This show featured scientists, so there you go. Just where did I insult any of the scientists from the show?

They did not mention a large decrease in CO2 because there was no large decrease in CO2. Sulphate aerosols reflect light and decrease the amount of energy the earth gets from the sun. And there was the matter, also, at that time, of the Maunder Minimum. Anybody with the sligtest knowledge of earth science knows these facts.

All that's needed is a grasp if logic and it is obvious he has made no point.

The problem is the inability to distinguish between reality and fantacy. "Did" and "didn't" don't register.

And to the AGW cult that "should", "could", "might" are well defined terms that mean that it will happen with 100% certainty based on false consensus in the AGW religious cult.

 

[jc456]

You insulted all of science and deeply insulted any school teacher that ever thought they could show you how to think.

Could you identify the person who told you that AGW insists that all temperature changes in the history of the planet have been caused by changes in atmospheric CO2? Cause they need a good flogging.

So, could you prove that 120 PPM of CO2 affects temperatures? Nope, so you are a pot calling a kettle with this one. Nice job....LoSiNg

 

[jc456]

Your inability to understand the implications of other gases is really interesting. This show featured scientists, so there you go. Just where did I insult any of the scientists from the show?

They did not mention a large decrease in CO2 because there was no large decrease in CO2. Sulphate aerosols reflect light and decrease the amount of energy the earth gets from the sun. And there was the matter, also, at that time, of the Maunder Minimum. Anybody with the sligtest knowledge of earth science knows these facts.

All that's needed is a grasp if logic and it is obvious he has made no point.

The problem is the inability to distinguish between reality and fantacy. "Did" and "didn't" don't register.

Perhaps you could team up with Crick and find that experiment that actually proves that CO2 drives climate. So what is the temperature change when increased CO2 is 120 PPM? You have that eh? haahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahaha. Just because the dude is new to the discussion doesn't mean you have to rehash all of your old statements that are invalid due to no evidence. you is Losing

 

[jc456]

Your inability to understand the implications of other gases is really interesting. This show featured scientists, so there you go. Just where did I insult any of the scientists from the show?

They did not mention a large decrease in CO2 because there was no large decrease in CO2. Sulphate aerosols reflect light and decrease the amount of energy the earth gets from the sun. And there was the matter, also, at that time, of the Maunder Minimum. Anybody with the sligtest knowledge of earth science knows these facts.

All that's needed is a grasp if logic and it is obvious he has made no point.

The problem is the inability to distinguish between reality and fantacy. "Did" and "didn't" don't register.

Another pot calling out a kettle. Dude, your statements are sooooooo old. Come up with some new material at least. But LoSinG

 

[saveliberty]

Egad, are you that stupid on everything in life? And you sit there posting on an internet board, denigrating scientists. And that irony undoubtedly sailed right past you.

Your inability to understand the implications of other gases is really interesting. This show featured scientists, so there you go. Just where did I insult any of the scientists from the show?

They did not mention a large decrease in CO2 because there was no large decrease in CO2. Sulphate aerosols reflect light and decrease the amount of energy the earth gets from the sun. And there was the matter, also, at that time, of the Maunder Minimum. Anybody with the sligtest knowledge of earth science knows these facts.

Thanks for admiting there are much larger drivers of climate than CO2. None of which has thing one to do with human intervention. Loser.

 

[Crick]

Thanks for admiting there are much larger drivers of climate than CO2. None of which has thing one to do with human intervention. Loser.

Yes, ten mile wide asteroids are dramatic. Supervolcanoes capable of covering an entire continent a mile deep in lava are large drivers. But the fact that such things exist doesn't make AGW harmless. One thing that has turned up a dozen different ways is the speed with which AGW is raising temperatures, melting ice and lowering ocean pH when compared to geological record including most extinction events.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Thanks for admiting there are much larger drivers of climate than CO2. None of which has thing one to do with human intervention. Loser.

Yes, ten mile wide asteroids are dramatic. Supervolcanoes capable of covering an entire continent a mile deep in lava are large drivers. But the fact that such things exist doesn't make AGW harmless. One thing that has turned up a dozen different ways is the speed with which AGW is raising temperatures, melting ice and lowering ocean pH when compared to geological record including most extinction events.

So why can't you show us an experiment where 120ppm of CO2 does all of that

 

[Crick]

Because when I have you simply lie through your teeth and claim you never saw it., that's why.

 

[saveliberty]

Glacial ice is increasing in many parts of the world. Cherry picking once again I see.

 

[Crick]

Glacial ice is increasing in many parts of the world. Cherry picking once again I see.

Prove it.

 

[Crick]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Because when I have you simply lie through your teeth and claim you never saw it., that's why.

Yes I'm lying....Be a doll and show everyone this experiment that shows how a 120ppm increase in CO2 raises temperature by 2-8 degrees and drops ocean pH.

That will embarrass me completely

 

[Crick]

 

[Crick]

Because when I have you simply lie through your teeth and claim you never saw it., that's why.

Yes I'm lying....Be a doll and show everyone this experiment that shows how a 120ppm increase in CO2 raises temperature by 2-8 degrees and drops ocean pH.

That will embarrass me completely

It will not embarrass you because, as you have repeatedly demonstrated to us, you have no honor and you have no shame. You will simply lie about it. It has been presented to you repeatedly. I'm not going to waste my time again giving you another opportunity to show us what a reeking piece of shit you actually are.