The best case a lay person can make against AGW

[mamooth]

what on earth are you talking about???????Hanson said in 2006 his model showed we had 10 years to change climate or we'd be doomed.

He did not say what you're claiming. He said change would have to start within ten years, or major problems would occur much later.

So, are you just too stupid to parse simple English, or are you being deliberately dishonest?

 

[PredFan]

I said the same thing to American airlines. The "pilot" said he could fly but since AA has had crashes in the past I said "I'll fly this thing" (btw I'm not a pilot).

But since theyve made mistakes before I figured that trusting any pilot is a bridge too far. The airline disagreed but that's because the establishment "pilots" sought to conspire against me.

Yeah too bad that isn't true, we wouldn't have to listen to your stupid drivel now.

 

[Old Rocks]

My take is quite simple. We've had five major ice ages. Guess what happened in between? It freaking warmed up. And we were not around.

Climate changes.

yes climate changes and we really don't know climate history at all. For example was the Little Ice Age regional or not. So how do we know if temp is going up normally after ice age?

Because, by the Milankovic Cycles that controlled all previous ice ages, we should be gradually, very slowly, descending into the next ice age. And that is exactly what we were doing, until the advent of the Industrial Revolution and the massive burning of fossil fuel. If you actually bothered to do a little research instead of just flapping your dumb yap, you would know this.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I said the same thing to American airlines. The "pilot" said he could fly but since AA has had crashes in the past I said "I'll fly this thing" (btw I'm not a pilot).

But since theyve made mistakes before I figured that trusting any pilot is a bridge too far. The airline disagreed but that's because the establishment "pilots" sought to conspire against me.

Do people who study worms experts on climate change? Mr low information voter


Society of Nematologists Says man made climate change is realreal

 

[PredFan]

There isn't one shred of proof that man is residing temperatures by his actions. There is no science there all there is is agenda driven politics masquerading as science.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Wrong, as everyone, including insurance companies, agrees weather extremes are getting worse.

.

A liberal loves to lie!!!!
As Buffett pointed out his letter, the insurance premiums for covering catastrophes have fallen in recent years, making that type of coverage less lucrative than before. Indeed, global financial losses from weather events in 2015 were lower than any other year since 2009

 

[mamooth]

Climate Science is to "Science" as Astrology is to "Astronomy".

It sounds like something legit, but it's track record is as reliable as Tarot cards and Palm readings....it's a total joke.

Except it's been very accurate for over 30 years running now. Only brainwashed political cultists still try to deny it.

That's why climate science has such credibility, because it's been so successful with its predictions for so long. And that's why deniers are considered to be cult cranks, because they've failed so completely at everything for so long.

Deniers, it's not our fault that you suck so hard at the science. You're simply not going to get any crediblity until you stop sucking, and whining won't change that.

 

[Zander]

Climate Science is to "Science" as Astrology is to "Astronomy".

It sounds like something legit, but it's track record is as reliable as Tarot cards and Palm readings....it's a total joke.

Except it's been very accurate for over 30 years running now. Only brainwashed political cultists still try to deny it.

That's why climate science has such credibility, because it's been so successful with its predictions for so long. And that's why deniers are considered to be cult cranks, because they've failed so completely at everything for so long.

Deniers, it's not our fault that you suck so hard at the science. You're simply not going to get any crediblity until you stop sucking, and whining won't change that.

Climate "Science" the illustrated version....

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And it did. The "hiatus" was essentially a denier invention. Everyone who knew statistics saw the steady upward trend, which continues now.

[.

Bumps and wiggles
Susan Solomon, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, says that Fyfe’s framework helps to put twenty-first-century trends into perspective, and clearly indicates that the rate of warming slowed down at a time when greenhouse-gas emissions were rising dramatically.

 

[Old Rocks]

Climate Science is to "Science" as Astrology is to "Astronomy".

It sounds like something legit, but it's track record is as reliable as Tarot cards and Palm readings....it's a total joke.

What a fucked up liar you are. First, until 2000, liars like you were insisting that there was no warming. Then, when everyone could see it in their backyard, they changed their story to 'it is all natural'. And the leading scientist in this field in 1981, accurately predicted what we are seeing right now;

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_ha04600x.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and 1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the fabled Northwest Passage.

The Northwest Passage first opened in 2007. And last summer, a 900 passenger luxury cruise ship made the passage. When Dr. Hansen made this prediction, he thought that the passage would open up in the latter half of the 21st century. And was called an alarmist for making that statement. Turns out to have been a very conservative prediction.

 

[mamooth]

There isn't one shred of proof that man is residing temperatures by his actions. There is no science there all there is is agenda driven politics masquerading as science.

No, you're just an imbecile who knows nothing of the science.

Tell us, cultist, what do you make of the stratospheric cooling, the increase in backradiation, the changes in outgoing longwave radiation, all of which are smoking guns for human-caused global warming?

Oh, you mean you don't know what those big words mean? That means, idiot manchild, that you should stay out of the grownup conversations.

Now, I hear your masters calling. They need another coat of saliva applied. Run along, your services are required.

 

[mamooth]

A liberal loves to lie!!!!
As Buffett pointed out his letter, the insurance premiums for covering catastrophes have fallen in recent years, making that type of coverage less lucrative than before. Indeed, global financial losses from weather events in 2015 were lower than any other year since 2009

So, you're a statistical ignoramus as well, a fool who cherrypicks one year and ignores the trend.

No wonder you were such easy pickins' for the denier cult. You simply lack the common sense to resist the propaganda.

 

[Zander]

Get your "Climate Science"....on sale now!! Pick up some beer while you're here!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

He said change would have to start within ten years, or major problems would occur much later.

what on earth are you talking about???????Hanson said in 2006 his model showed we had 10 years to change climate or we'd be doomed.

He did not say what you're claiming. He said change would have to start within ten years, or major problems would occur much later.

So, are you just too stupid to parse simple English, or are you being deliberately dishonest?

Old View (July 2006):

“We have at most ten years—not ten years to decide upon action, but ten years to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions” he wrote in his July 2006 review of Al Gore’s book/movie, An Inconvenient Truth. “We have reached a critical tipping point,” he assured readers, adding “it will soon be impossible to avoid climate change with far-ranging undesirable consequences.”

feel like a fool liberal now?

 

[Old Rocks]

Antarctic Daily Images


Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Now make your case that that does not represent warming.

 

[mamooth]

yes climate changes and we really don't know climate history at all. For example was the Little Ice Age regional or not.

It was regional. That's well known. All the data confirms that.

So how do we know if temp is going up normally after ice age?

Because global temperature stopped going up 8000 years ago, and had been gradually cooling since. It should have kept on slowly cooling into the next ice age. That's how the natural cycle was working. Instead, things totally reversed and switched to fast warming. Being that's the exact opposite of the natural cycle, it's clearly not the natural cycle.

 

[Zander]

Get your "Doomsday Clocks". Al Gore says we only have 10 years to save the planet....

11 years later and ......STILL HERE!!!

 

[Wyatt earp]

Climate Science is to "Science" as Astrology is to "Astronomy".

It sounds like something legit, but it's track record is as reliable as Tarot cards and Palm readings....it's a total joke.

Except it's been very accurate for over 30 years running now. Only brainwashed political cultists still try to deny it.

That's why climate science has such credibility, because it's been so successful with its predictions for so long. And that's why deniers are considered to be cult cranks, because they've failed so completely at everything for so long.

Deniers, it's not our fault that you suck so hard at the science. You're simply not going to get any crediblity until you stop sucking, and whining won't change that.

Except it's been very accurate for over 30 years running now.


So you agree prior 30 years ago it was highly inaccurate..


Check..


But yet your your that statistically ingnorant that you think 30 years is some how significant?


Jesus Christ..


.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It was regional. That's well known. All the data confirms that.

.

can the liar tell us what region????????

 

[Old Rocks]

He said change would have to start within ten years, or major problems would occur much later.

what on earth are you talking about???????Hanson said in 2006 his model showed we had 10 years to change climate or we'd be doomed.

He did not say what you're claiming. He said change would have to start within ten years, or major problems would occur much later.

So, are you just too stupid to parse simple English, or are you being deliberately dishonest?

Old View (July 2006):

“We have at most ten years—not ten years to decide upon action, but ten years to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions” he wrote in his July 2006 review of Al Gore’s book/movie, An Inconvenient Truth. “We have reached a critical tipping point,” he assured readers, adding “it will soon be impossible to avoid climate change with far-ranging undesirable consequences.”

feel like a fool liberal now?

Why should anyone feel like a fool over that statement? Other than those like you that seem incapable of understanding that he is saying that if we continue as we have, the future is going to be not to our liking. Perhaps he used too many multisyllable words?