Tyndall Lecture

[skookerasbil]

The models are bogus.......they have ZERO value for predicting the future!!!!


The models are wrong | Behind The Black

 

[skookerasbil]

To The Horror Of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here - Forbes

 

[skookerasbil]

You know that things are not going the k00ks way when a major meteorlogical institute in Geramny......long known to be on the alarmist side.......are now siding with the denialists!!!


According to them......this whole narrative of imminent danger from AGW is a complete myth!!!


Max Planck Institute For Meteorology: ?Prognoses Confirm Model Forecasts? Warming Postponed ?Hundreds Of Years?

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[SSDD]

If your beliefs prevent you from reading and understanding what you are reading, then print references are unlikely help you improve your level of understanding.

Point out anything located at any of the sites you linked to that provide hard, observed, measured, empirical evidence to support any of the claims being made.

 

[Trakar]

If your beliefs prevent you from reading and understanding what you are reading, then print references are unlikely help you improve your level of understanding.

Point out anything located at any of the sites you linked to that provide hard, observed, measured, empirical evidence to support any of the claims being made.

Statement #1”The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.”
Statement #2 “Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.”
AGU Position Statement: Human Impacts on Climate
​

The information is in the entire content of those references, there is no single piece of content that is unimportant, irrelevant or not addressing one or both of the statements which you mistakenly are attempting to cast doubt upon.

Compelling supportive evidences cited in References already presented –
The first link as well as the embedded link references is dedicated to explaining and discussing the evidences supporting that climate change is due to unbalanced and shifting energy within the planetary environment.
The second link lays out the empiric evidences of climate change and explains the connections between the mechanisms and processes that generate the evidences.
The third link is an overview of AGW and the empiric evidences supporting the various AGW theories, which combine to provide a robust and compelling explanation of the modern climate-warming event. This link is from one of the more common textbooks “An Introduction to Physical Geography and the Environment” used in introducing upper level Geology and Environment college courses throughout the English speaking world (and beyond).
​

 

[flacaltenn]

Trakar::

Do me a couple favors please...

Statement #1”The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.”
Statement #2 “Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.”

In statement one -- define "out of balance" and please highlight the historical epoch when it wasn't.

In statement two --- show me that the onset and decay of the Ice ages didn't have "rates and patterns" that were "not natural"..

You're using some really really "cloudy" quantifiers there. Kinda like the Shaman at the solar eclipse..

 

[SSDD]

Trakar::

Do me a couple favors please...

Statement #1”The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.”
Statement #2 “Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.”

In statement one -- define "out of balance" and please highlight the historical epoch when it wasn't.

In statement two --- show me that the onset and decay of the Ice ages didn't have "rates and patterns" that were "not natural"..

You're using some really really "cloudy" quantifiers there. Kinda like the Shaman at the solar eclipse..

You beat me to it. These true beleivers seem to universally have no idea what constitutes actual proof and what doesn't. Ask for proof and you get the sort of claptrap above and the sad thing is that I believe that they beleive they are actually providing the proof they were asked for.

 

[flacaltenn]

Trakar::

Do me a couple favors please...

Statement #1”The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.”
Statement #2 “Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.”

In statement one -- define "out of balance" and please highlight the historical epoch when it wasn't.

In statement two --- show me that the onset and decay of the Ice ages didn't have "rates and patterns" that were "not natural"..

You're using some really really "cloudy" quantifiers there. Kinda like the Shaman at the solar eclipse..

You beat me to it. These true beleivers seem to universally have no idea what constitutes actual proof and what doesn't. Ask for proof and you get the sort of claptrap above and the sad thing is that I believe that they beleive they are actually providing the proof they were asked for.

Sadder thing is that Trakar knows better than to substitute vague emotional descriptions for actual scientific evidence. But in the heat of battle, it all becomes a lyrical recital of how man is destroying the crystal purity of the planet. Couldn't possibly remain "NATURAL" with so much population and consumption.. Isn't that evident to everyone?

They just can't actually say that..

 

[Old Rocks]

Actually, given the history of this debate, you dumb asses are going to lose again as the climate demostrates what is going on. And you will find some other dumb ass things to say, and claim you never said what you have already said.

 

[Trakar]

Trakar::

Do me a couple favors please...

Statement #1”The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.”
Statement #2 “Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.”

In statement one -- define "out of balance" and please highlight the historical epoch when it wasn't.

In statement two --- show me that the onset and decay of the Ice ages didn't have "rates and patterns" that were "not natural"..

Please recall, the statements are made by the American Geophysical Union in the link I have repeatedly provided. I would be happy to offer my understanding and interpretation of their statements, but the most accurate means to have these specific questions answered is through interaction with the American Geophysical Union.
AGU Position Statement: Human Impacts on Climate

Policy Contact:

Elizabeth Landau
AGU
Public Affairs Manager
Phone: +1 202 777 7535
Fax: +1 202 328 0566
E-mail: [email protected]

Erik Hankin
AGU
Public Affairs Coordinator
Phone: +1 202 777 7523
Fax: +1 202 328 0566
Email: [email protected]

Kristan Uhlenbrock
AGU
Public Affairs Coordinator
Phone: +1 202 777 7506
Fax: +1 202 328 0566
Email: [email protected]

You're using some really really "cloudy" quantifiers there. Kinda like the Shaman at the solar eclipse..

I'll have to take your word about the shaman's at the solar eclipse, it is apparently something you have much more personal experience with than I.

Which of the terms that I've used, are you having trouble clearly understanding?

 

[flacaltenn]

Even more delicious if those statement are from the AGU.. Because of the laughable construct. So the lack of scientific rigor is NOT yours but authored from the exec offices of a prestigious bullhorn of AGW bullshit. I certainly WILL write all those genuises for clarification and let you know their explanations. That is if they're not exhorting conch shells from the natives of Papua on a really hot and muggy day.

I DID observe above that I thought YOU would know better.

 

[Trakar]

Communicating Climate Science: A Historic Look to the Future
-http://chapman.agu.org/climatescience/communicating-climate-science/

The goal of this Chapman Conference is to bring together scholars, social scientists, and journalists to discuss both the history and recent advances in the understanding of climate science and how to communicate that science to policymakers, the media, and society. A research agenda of the conference will focus on the efficacy of scientific communication, with ideas on improved practices arising as an outcome from collaborations spawned at the conference.

This exploration will take place through: 1) discussions covering the history of climate science and successes and failures in communicating scientific ideas to the policy makers and public; 2) an assessment of where we are with respect to current knowledge of climate science and its communication and acceptance by society; 3) a comparison with experiences in other areas producing similar difficulties between scientific knowledge dissemination, societal acceptance of that knowledge, and governance.

Researchers, Policymakers, Industry Leaders Gather for AGU's Annual Science Policy Conference - MSN Money - June 20, 2013 2:17 PM ET
Researchers, Policymakers, Industry Leaders Gather for AGU's Annual Science Policy Conference: PR Newswire Business News - MSN Money

Among the Issues Covered Will Be: Policies for Reducing Risk from Natural Hazards, Potential for Carbon Capture and Storage, and the Impact of Climate Change on Human Health

WASHINGTON, June 20, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Researchers from leading scientific research institutions, federal and state agency representatives, industry leaders, and NGO staffers will gather in Washington, DC on 24 – 26 June for the American Geophysical Union's (AGU -0.41%, news) second annual Science Policy Conference. The event, which will take place at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center, will address a wide range of topics impacting the American economy and public safety, and how science can help solve these challenges and inform critical policy decisions. Conference highlights include:...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listen to the lecture, you senile old fart.

 

[Trakar]

Listen to the lecture, you senile old fart.

That is the strength of science, evidence falsifies its mistaken theories and understandings, new theories and understandings that better match and explain all relevant evidences replace the old. Theories only become compelling when they are robust enough to survive review, testing and new evidences. Much of the understanding regarding atmospheric CO2's impact upon the earth's climate, predate the study you link, and it has only grown continuously more robust since.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Listen to the lecture, you senile old fart.

That is the strength of science, evidence falsifies its mistaken theories and understandings, new theories and understandings that better match and explain all relevant evidences replace the old. Theories only become compelling when they are robust enough to survive review, testing and new evidences. Much of the understanding regarding atmospheric CO2's impact upon the earth's climate, predate the study you link, and it has only grown continuously more robust since.

At least phrenology had a chance to be real science

 

[flacaltenn]

Communicating Climate Science: A Historic Look to the Future
-http://chapman.agu.org/climatescience/communicating-climate-science/

The goal of this Chapman Conference is to bring together scholars, social scientists, and journalists to discuss both the history and recent advances in the understanding of climate science and how to communicate that science to policymakers, the media, and society. A research agenda of the conference will focus on the efficacy of scientific communication, with ideas on improved practices arising as an outcome from collaborations spawned at the conference.

This exploration will take place through: 1) discussions covering the history of climate science and successes and failures in communicating scientific ideas to the policy makers and public; 2) an assessment of where we are with respect to current knowledge of climate science and its communication and acceptance by society; 3) a comparison with experiences in other areas producing similar difficulties between scientific knowledge dissemination, societal acceptance of that knowledge, and governance.

Researchers, Policymakers, Industry Leaders Gather for AGU's Annual Science Policy Conference - MSN Money - June 20, 2013 2:17 PM ET
Researchers, Policymakers, Industry Leaders Gather for AGU's Annual Science Policy Conference: PR Newswire Business News - MSN Money

Among the Issues Covered Will Be: Policies for Reducing Risk from Natural Hazards, Potential for Carbon Capture and Storage, and the Impact of Climate Change on Human Health

WASHINGTON, June 20, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Researchers from leading scientific research institutions, federal and state agency representatives, industry leaders, and NGO staffers will gather in Washington, DC on 24 – 26 June for the American Geophysical Union's (AGU -0.41%, news) second annual Science Policy Conference. The event, which will take place at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center, will address a wide range of topics impacting the American economy and public safety, and how science can help solve these challenges and inform critical policy decisions. Conference highlights include:...

Please DO put me on the email for that one.. I can't wait to see those journalists exposed to a WIDE array of scientific opinions and honest appraisal.. Would LOVE to here the UAH CLimate scientists present a BALANCED view of the threat probabilities.

What a great idea.. At least --- until the "science is settled"...

 

[Trakar]

That is the strength of science, evidence falsifies its mistaken theories and understandings, new theories and understandings that better match and explain all relevant evidences replace the old. Theories only become compelling when they are robust enough to survive review, testing and new evidences. Much of the understanding regarding atmospheric CO2's impact upon the earth's climate, predate the study you link, and it has only grown continuously more robust since.

At least phrenology had a chance to be real science

While irrelevant to this discussion, that is your assertion to support or retract, but it is rather curious that when given the choice, you find bumpy headed fortune-telling that was falsified more than a century ago to be more to your liking than century old science that is has been widely and compellingly supported.

 

[westwall]

Listen to the lecture, you senile old fart.

That is the strength of science, evidence falsifies its mistaken theories and understandings, new theories and understandings that better match and explain all relevant evidences replace the old. Theories only become compelling when they are robust enough to survive review, testing and new evidences. Much of the understanding regarding atmospheric CO2's impact upon the earth's climate, predate the study you link, and it has only grown continuously more robust since.

Science is MEASURABLE. You guys do everything possible to avoid presenting anything that is measurable...that makes it pseudo-scientific monkey boy....

 

[Trakar]

That is the strength of science, evidence falsifies its mistaken theories and understandings, new theories and understandings that better match and explain all relevant evidences replace the old. Theories only become compelling when they are robust enough to survive review, testing and new evidences. Much of the understanding regarding atmospheric CO2's impact upon the earth's climate, predate the study you link, and it has only grown continuously more robust since.

Science is MEASURABLE. You guys do everything possible to avoid presenting anything that is measurable...that makes it pseudo-scientific monkey boy....

Your assertions are unsupported, incorrect and without standing. Your personal name-calling is simply rude and vulgar, and generally a poor reflection upon your upbringing.