The definitive guide to the "Global Warming" scam

[jc456]

What about 1860? 1760?

I'm not interested in your games. If you have a point to make, then state it directly.

his point was made and you are the fool.

 

[jc456]

Watching this guy work so hard to deny reality is equal parts funny and disturbing:

Scientists chose 1.5C as one benchmark to list what bad things would happen at that point.

Note the propaganda there? The climate scientist quoted in this article did not say “we picked this as a benchmark to list what bad things would happen at that point”. Here is what he actually said, word-for-word:

Jeff Berardelli, a CBS News meteorologist and "climate specialist," admitted this week that a key metric scientists cite to warn about the dangers of climate change is not rooted in provable science.

See they cannot link any “list of what bad things would happen at that point” because they have no provable science of what will occur with a 1.5° change

they need the bartender and high school child to sing loudly we're gonna die!!!!!!!

Cause them two there, they are the cat's meow to a demofk. can't make it up either. it's so hilarious,

What's further funny, is they scream at us scientists, believe the scientists, from those who believe a bartender and high school child.

 

[mamooth]

Of course choosing 1.5C was arbitrarry. Any choice is arbitrary, but that doesn't mean making a choice is bad.

Science isn’t “arbitrary”, princess. Science - real/actual science - is precise. This literally proves that “Global Warming” is a hoax.

No it doesn't. Not even remotely. You're just raving like a kook now. I mean, even moreso than usual. Do you even understand what you parrot? Probably not.

To show you understand, explain, in your own words, why scientists using round numbers like 1.5 or 2.0 to illustrate shows that global warming is a hoax. If they had used 1.6343 or 1.7601 instead, would that have proved it wasn't a hoax?

 

[jc456]

Of course choosing 1.5C was arbitrarry. Any choice is arbitrary, but that doesn't mean making a choice is bad.

Science isn’t “arbitrary”, princess. Science - real/actual science - is precise. This literally proves that “Global Warming” is a hoax.

No it doesn't. Not even remotely. You're just raving like a kook now. I mean, even moreso than usual. Do you even understand what you parrot? Probably not.

To show you understand, explain, in your own words, why scientists using round numbers like 1.5 or 2.0 to illustrate shows that global warming is a hoax. If they had used 1.6343 or 1.7601 instead, would that have proved it wasn't a hoax?

arbitrary is not rounding up.

 

[P@triot]

You're just raving like a kook now.

Watching you try to deny what even the scientists now admit is priceless. You’re going to ride that “Global Warming” lie to your grave. I guess your very fragile ego feels just too invested in the lie at the point to abandon it.

 

[P@triot]

To show you understand, explain, in your own words, why scientists using round numbers like 1.5 or 2.0 to illustrate shows that global warming is a hoax.

Because they admitted that the “claims” of what will happen at that temperature is not even remotely rooted in science. It was all 100% made up.

Jeff Berardelli, a CBS News meteorologist and "climate specialist," admitted this week that a key metric scientists cite to warn about the dangers of climate change is not rooted in provable science.

Watching you argue “the sky isn’t blue and the sun isn’t hot” is just entertainment at this point.

Climate scientist admits key climate change metric is just something experts 'chose': 'Symbolic marker' | Blaze Media

Jeff Berardelli, a CBS News meteorologist and "climate specialist," admitted this week that a key metric scientists cite to warn about the dangers of climate change is not rooted in provable science.What is the background?The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published a report in 2018...

www.theblaze.com

 

[P@triot]

Imagine how wonderful our world would be if the left wasn’t so damn ignorant and submissive. If they would just question power and use an ounce of critical thinking, we would have more liberty, less pollution, more prosperity, etc.

Are Electric Cars Really Green? | PragerU

Are electric cars greener than conventional gasoline cars? If so, how much greener? What about the CO2 emissions produced during electric cars' production?…

www.prageru.com

 

[mamooth]

Because they admitted that the “claims” of what will happen at that temperature is not even remotely rooted in science. It was all 100% made up.

No, they didn't. Your claim there is 100% made up.

Remember, your inability to read and understand simple English only reflects badly on you.

Now, what else did your masters tell you to say today? Run and check.

 

[jc456]

Because they admitted that the “claims” of what will happen at that temperature is not even remotely rooted in science. It was all 100% made up.

No, they didn't. Your claim there is 100% made up.

Remember, your inability to read and understand simple English only reflects badly on you.

Now, what else did your masters tell you to say today? Run and check.

except

To show you understand, explain, in your own words, why scientists using round numbers like 1.5 or 2.0 to illustrate shows that global warming is a hoax.

Because they admitted that the “claims” of what will happen at that temperature is not even remotely rooted in science. It was all 100% made up.

Jeff Berardelli, a CBS News meteorologist and "climate specialist," admitted this week that a key metric scientists cite to warn about the dangers of climate change is not rooted in provable science.

Watching you argue “the sky isn’t blue and the sun isn’t hot” is just entertainment at this point.

Climate scientist admits key climate change metric is just something experts 'chose': 'Symbolic marker' | Blaze Media

Jeff Berardelli, a CBS News meteorologist and "climate specialist," admitted this week that a key metric scientists cite to warn about the dangers of climate change is not rooted in provable science.What is the background?The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published a report in 2018...

www.theblaze.com

 

[P@triot]

Because they admitted that the “claims” of what will happen at that temperature is not even remotely rooted in science. It was all 100% made up.

No, they didn't. Your claim there is 100% made up.

Hahahaha! Mammaries...I know you think that pretending that reality isn't real is having some affect, but I assure you, it's not. The more you argue this, the more we get to bring to light the fact that the "Global Warming" scam was exposed.

Jeff Berardelli, a CBS News meteorologist and "climate specialist," admitted this week that a key metric scientists cite to warn about the dangers of climate change is not rooted in provable science.

Which part of "not rooted in provable science" do you not understand?

Climate scientist admits key climate change metric is just something experts 'chose': 'Symbolic marker' | Blaze Media

Jeff Berardelli, a CBS News meteorologist and "climate specialist," admitted this week that a key metric scientists cite to warn about the dangers of climate change is not rooted in provable science.What is the background?The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published a report in 2018...

www.theblaze.com

 

[P@triot]

No, they didn't. Your claim there is 100% made up.

I'm not going to lie...watching you seethe over and over because I continue to bend you over my knee and discipline you with facts really does bring me joy.

You were conditioned to believe a failed ideology and because of that, you're committed to that failed ideology to the bitter end, facts and reality be damned.

Your frustration/aggravation/desperation is palpable...

 

[mamooth]

I'm not going to lie...

Of course you are. After all, you keep doing it, over and over. The dude said nothing like your article claimed. You keep quoting what your conspiracy cult article claimed, instead of what the guy arctually said.

So, the usual question applies. Are you being deliberately dishonest, or are you just a cult imbecile?

watching you seethe over and over because I continue to bend you over my knee and discipline you with facts really does bring me joy.

Your butthurt is boring. Do you think you're the first whiny pussy I've had pout-stalking me? Please try to come up with something more original. Put some effort into your butthurt, instead of just phoning it in.

 

[P@triot]

Do you think you're the first whiny pussy I've had pout-stalking me?

#TheSeethingIsReal

Even the scientists are admitting it was all made up. This is a terrible hill for you to die on. But man is it priceless for the rest of us!

 

[DudleySmith]

Steven Koonin's book is out, and gives a detailed analysis of how the climate change scammers have massaged and lied about the data. It's so good the commies began smearing him without ever actually refuting anything he reported, a month before it was even going to hit the shelves.

Amazon product

Biography​

Dr. Steven E. Koonin is a University Professor at New York University, with appointments in the Stern School of Business, the Tandon School of Engineering, and the Department of Physics. He founded NYU’s Center for Urban Science and Progress, which focuses research and education on the acquisition, integration, and analysis of big data for big cities.

Dr. Koonin served as Undersecretary for Science in the US Department of Energy under President Obama from 2009 to 2011, where his portfolio included the climate research program and energy technology strategy. He was the lead author of the US Department of Energy’s Strategic Plan (2011) and the inaugural Department of Energy Quadrennial Technology Review (2011). Before joining the government, Dr. Koonin spent five years as Chief Scientist for BP, researching renewable energy options to move the company “beyond petroleum.”

For almost thirty years, Dr. Koonin was a professor of theoretical physics at Caltech. He also served for nine years as Caltech’s Vice President and Provost, facilitating the research of more than 300 scientists and engineers and catalyzing the development of the world’s largest optical telescope, as well as research initiatives in computational science, bioengineering, and the biological sciences.

In addition to the National Academy of Sciences, Dr. Koonin’s memberships include the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and JASON, the group of scientists who solve technical problems for the US government; he served as JASON’s chair for six years. He chaired the National Academies’ Divisional Committee for Engineering and Physical Sciences from 2014 to 2019, and since 2014 has been a trustee of the Institute for Defense Analyses. He is currently an independent governor of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and has served in similar roles for the Los Alamos, Sandia, Brookhaven, and Argonne National Laboratories. He is a member of Governor Cuomo’s Blue Ribbon Commission to Reimagine New York in the post-COVID-19 era.

Dr. Koonin has a BS in Physics from Caltech and a PhD in Theoretical Physics from MIT. He is an award-winning classroom teacher and his public lectures are noted for their clarity in conveying complex subjects. He is the author of the classic 1985 textbook Computational Physics, which introduced methodology for building computer models of complex physical systems. He has published some 200 peer-reviewed papers in the fields of physics and astrophysics, scientific computation, energy technology and policy, and climate science, and has been the lead author on multiple book-length reports, including two National Academies studies.

Through a series of articles and lectures that began in 2014, Dr. Koonin has advocated for a more accurate, complete, and transparent public representation of climate and energy matters.

From the reviews:


J. A May
5.0 out of 5 stars An important book on climate change by a famous physicist
Reviewed in the United States on May 4, 2021

" Koonin explains the sorry state of climate science today. What the IPCC and U.S. government tell us about climate science is usually true, but in their effort “to persuade, rather than inform,” they leave out what doesn’t fit their narrative. They tell us enough to be alarmed, not enough to educate. It is this loss of scientific integrity that is alarming, not the climate.

Much of the book is spent dispelling the myth that extreme weather events are increasing due to human-caused climate change. He relates that heat waves are not more common today than they were in 1900, tornados are not trending up, nor are droughts, hurricanes or flooding. Koonin criticizes the media for claiming that extreme weather is somehow related to human activities, when there is no evidence to support this.

Koonin was President Obama’s Under Secretary for Science in the Department of Energy. Later in 2020, Obama declared we are in an “epistemological crisis.” Whether we agree with Obama on the issues or not, we agree that the U.S. is in a crisis with respect to truth and knowledge. Science is all about determining the truth in an objective and reproducible way. One’s feelings don’t matter, excuses don’t matter, consensus opinions don’t matter, what you call it (“global warming” or “climate change”) doesn’t matter, only what you present that can be reproduced independently matters. Unsettled is about getting science back on track, scientists should report what they know, what they don’t know, what they modeled, and what they observed. Nothing more, nothing less. "

Bold added by me. The left has less than zero credibility on any of this. Biden's 'initiatves' are nothing but scams to subsidize fake companies and embezzle Federal funds.

Amazon product

 

[P@triot]

"Koonin explains the sorry state of climate science today. What the IPCC and U.S. government tell us about climate science is usually true, but in their effort “to persuade, rather than inform,” they leave out what doesn’t fit their narrative. They tell us enough to be alarmed, not enough to educate. It is this loss of scientific integrity that is alarming, not the climate.

Much of the book is spent dispelling the myth that extreme weather events are increasing due to human-caused climate change. He relates that heat waves are not more common today than they were in 1900, tornados are not trending up, nor are droughts, hurricanes or flooding. Koonin criticizes the media for claiming that extreme weather is somehow related to human activities, when there is no evidence to support this.

Hey mamooth - you're pretty damn quite over there about these indisputable facts!

You were duped, sweetie. Perhaps next time you'll be a little more skeptical and engage in some actual critical thinking for yourself. But sadly, probably not.

 

[mamooth]

Hey mamooth - you're pretty damn quite over there about these indisputable facts!

What facts? Koonin is just another denier shill who lies for money.

If you'd like to discuss any of his specific claims, feel free. Pick one.

You won't, of course. You're not capable of honest discussion.

 

[P@triot]

Koonin is just another denier shill who lies for money.

Mammaries: “Scientists should be listened to at all costs, no matter what”

Also Mammaries: “Dr. Koonin - who has a BS in Physics from Caltech and a PhD in Theoretical Physics from MIT - is just a denier shill who lies for money”

Mammaries…he earned a fucking PhD from MIT. The faux “scientists” who have duped you couldn’t do that if they all worked together

 

[DudleySmith]

Hey mamooth - you're pretty damn quite over there about these indisputable facts!

What facts? Koonin is just another denier shill who lies for money.

If you'd like to discuss any of his specific claims, feel free. Pick one.

You won't, of course. You're not capable of honest discussion.

I could care less what you and your ilk think about anything, I posted the recommendation for the book for the benefit of lurkers, not because I give a shit what commies think. You aren't here to actually debate anything, just shill for your Commissars. And, the guy is not a 'Denier', whatever that is, he's a scientist who worked on the projects under the Obama administration, unlike you, who merely parrots what a collection of media hacks who aren't scientists tell you to.

 

[mamooth]

I could care less what you and your ilk think about anything, I posted the recommendation for the book for the benefit of lurkers,

Got it. You're not even pretending you can debate the issues. You're just a parrot.

not because I give a shit what commies think. You aren't here to actually debate anything,

Yet I'm the one who just asked you to debate the issue, and you're one who refused.

And Koonan isn't a climate scientist. I am more qualified to talk about climate science than he is, so your argument-from-authority faceplants.

Since you're so big on the "BUT... BUT... I HAD A LINK!" thing, let me give you some links refuting Koonan's garbage. You won't read them, of course, because your cult forbids you from looking at non-cult sources.

Dissecting 'Unsettled,' a Skeptical Physicist’s Book About Climate Science - Inside Climate News

Physicist Steven Koonin, a former BP chief scientist and Obama administration energy official, seeks to downplay climate change risk in his new book, “Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What it Doesn’t and Why it Matters.” His critics say he often draws general conclusions from specific...

insideclimatenews.org

A New Book Manages to Get Climate Science Badly Wrong

In Unsettled, Steven Koonin deploys that highly misleading label to falsely suggest that we don’t understand the risks well enough to take action

www.scientificamerican.com

Wall Street Journal article repeats multiple incorrect and misleading claims made in Steven Koonin’s new book ’Unsettled’

Scientists who reviewed the article found that it builds on a collection of misleading and false claims. For instance, Koonin states that “Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was eighty years ago”. Contrary to the claim, scientific studies using airborne and...

climatefeedback.org

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/pt.5.8217/full/

https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2019/06/koonins-case-for-yet-another-review-of-climate-science/

Kooninisms

Gavin Schmidt has a Realclimate post about a recent talk given by Steve Koonin. Somewhat bizarrely, Koonin has a response to Gavin’s post that he has posted on WUWT. Given that Koonin has no …

andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com

Obviously, my offer still stands, if you want to debate any of Koonan's issues here. And just as obviously, you won't, because you can't.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And Koonan isn't a climate scientist. I am more qualified to talk about climate science than he is, so your argument-from-authority faceplants.

Why? What are your qualifications?