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.
When everybody realized there is no science to the man made warming bullshit and it was nothing more than a scam then the idiots made a religion out of it based on faith alone.
You little dumbasses that have adopted AGW as your religion are like the 12 year old girl that has been told that Santa Claus doesn't exist but still holds on to the fantasy because she wants to believe.
So, you're refusing to look at the science?You little dumbasses that have adopted AGW as your religion are like the 12 year old girl that has been told that Santa Claus doesn't exist but still holds on to the fantasy because she wants to believe.
You morons that believe in this silly ass AGW scam are like the people in the movie "Idocracy" that have been told that crops need Brawndo instead of water because it has electrolytes.So, you're refusing to look at the science?
Yes .it goes back further than that,,
recall a lot of claims back in the 70s with the ice age scare,,
In 1968, Al Gore was 20 years old, in college and 8 years away from his first elected seat in the House of Representatives. You might try to get your facts straight.Yes .
Club of Rome was set up in 1968 and it was in 1972 that they published , Limits to Growth, which sold 30 million copies .
First Climate Conference was in Vienna in 1979.
Al Gore , Maurice Strong and Swedish meteorologist Bert Bolin were the big three initially but it was not until 1988 that the IPCC was set up .
All political aimed at making billions from suckers and Gullibles .
And it did . And still does .
murice strong is the name I couldnt remember,, thanks for that,,Yes .
Club of Rome was set up in 1968 and it was in 1972 that they published , Limits to Growth, which sold 30 million copies .
First Climate Conference was in Vienna in 1979.
Al Gore , Maurice Strong and Swedish meteorologist Bert Bolin were the big three initially but it was not until 1988 that the IPCC was set up .
All political aimed at making billions from suckers and Gullibles .
And it did . And still does .
By elites of the Club of Rome, they freely admit it. Direct quite,
""In searching for a new enemy to unite us we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill." "The real enemy is humanity itself."
You can likely find this online for free also.
THE FIRST GLOBAL REVOLUTION: A Report by the Council of The Club of Rome (Unabridged Binder Print Copy)
Amazon product ASIN B0B2NCNB36
For one who is seen as a Troll on most major issues your advice is amusing .In 1968, Al Gore was 20 years old, in college and 8 years away from his first elected seat in the House of Representatives. You might try to get your facts straight.
Then you'll have no problem providing a link.For one who is seen as a Troll on most major issues your advice is amusing .
Of course my info is correct as ever with young Al parroting his father but more importantly misunderstanding the work of Dr Revelle whilst studying politics at Harvard .
DYOR , Troll .
Computer models aren't science.So, you're refusing to look at the science?
Computer models aren't science.
Now that's profound. What "conditions"?However, in reality, the models are only as good as the data used in them is as well as the conditions.
Quantify "really good". And could you tell us what parameters and functions are being left out of these models due to that complexity? What makes it "impossible"?And it is simply impossible to make really good models of a system as complex as the entire climate of a planet.
Can you give us a link that shows such a train of events taking place?Which is why when the models fail (which they keep doing), they simply modify the data to get the results they want.
Where did you learn of this?Or modify the code to achieve the results that were recorded. Either way, destroying the very purpose of the model in the first place.
GCMs use numeric methods to solve differential equations describing physical, thermocynamic and chemical processes between cells representing a small piece of the planet's atmopshere, ocean and land surface. What you've demonstrated here is that your knowledge of modern data processing and modeling is virtually nil.And for those that do not know about "Nuclear Gandhi", in a game written in 1991 the game adversaries were all given a "hostility rating" from 0 to 254. And being the most peaceful, Gandhi was assigned a rating of 0. However, once the game progressed and a character developed nukes, because of that power their aggression level would be reduced by 1 to reflect their new power weapon. Which had the unintended hilarity of Gandhi instantly going from a hostility of 0 to a hostility of 254 (the well known "zero overrun" error not unlike Y2K). And that is such a meme before memes in the gamer community, it is still a thing over 3 decades later (now not because of historical accuracy but it is simply expected as part of the game).
But it is also a real life example of how computer models can go horribly wrong.
Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.Now that's profound. What "conditions"?
See post #35Quantify "really good". And could you tell us what parameters and functions are being left out of these models due to that complexity? What makes it "impossible"?
See post #35Can you give us a link that shows such a train of events taking place?
Where did you learn of this?
See posts #35 and #38GCMs use numeric methods to solve differential equations describing physical, thermocynamic and chemical processes between cells representing a small piece of the planet's atmopshere, ocean and land surface. What you've demonstrated here is that your knowledge of modern data processing and modeling is virtually nil.
I stand by my conclusions. You don't have the faintest fuck of an idea what you're talking about.See posts #35 and #38