Reply With Quote
"closed peer review process"
More conspiracy posting.
Seems like you are claiming a conspiracy as far as I can tell.
"Verdict was planned'
AKA "a conspiracy to rig the outcome"
"closed peer review process"
More conspiracy posting.
Seems like you are claiming a conspiracy as far as I can tell.
As if the Koch brothers wouldn't be putting tons of money into funding climate science if it could establish the results they want. Wild Cobra's conspiracy theory here is as re ed as the Cosmored constantly posts on here about 9/11 and the moon landing being hoaxes.
Meh. You have little room, and likely little accuracy, when talking about logical fallacies, with as many as you seem to apply to this topic, i.e. "the scientists are all in on a giant conspiracy". It's like you have to drink another cup of stupid before posting sometimes.
Here is a bit that pokes some holes in your "its all due to soot" hypothesis:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate..._expected.html
Weather patterns, of the kind that represent feedback loops, are causing a lot more warming in cold places.
You know feedback loops? The kinds of things that we have been trying to drill into your thick skull might be dangerous, that is a prime example.
me: "let's not monkey with the climate much, because things might happen that we don't know about yet"
You: "CO2 is doesn't have enough of an effect to worry about"
I have been telling you we should quit poking the bear, and s like yourself have been copying/pasting the "no harm" bull propaganda for so long... the chickens are coming home to roost.
A conservative, risk-averse approach to CO2 emissions would have limited the damage.
Your super-liberal polyannish approach is ing us royally.
Yeah. Pretty much.
As I keep saying, I am willing to give some provisional trust that the experts saying CO2 is causing warming and climate change are right.
It is merely prudent to limit risk.
The funny thing about this is that limiting CO2 by putting investment into new greener infrastructure such as solar, wind, and other forms of green energy can be reasonably argued to provide long term economic growth that would offset any increased costs elsewhere. A bit like squeezing a balloon at one end. Efficient markets are like that.
The claims of doom and gloom economic impacts of limits on carbon emissions don't really meet any standard of evidence. You ever want a big round of nothing, ask for THAT.
A: "you guys are being alarmist about temperature, there is no evidence about that, lets not take any steps to limit CO2 because it could have harmful economic impacts"
B: "you are being alarmist about the economic impact, do you have any evidence about that?"
A: "um, peer review bad!"
Okaaaay.
You still going to say they ignore soot? How about your solar burp hypothesis or trying to take the CO2 feedback dynamic and trying to apply it ad hoc to the oceans irradiance? The BEST project was solely created to address alternate hypothesis like the urban heat island effect or concerns about instrumentation.
You are so completely demonstrably full of , dimwit.
I pity you Random. Having nothing better to do than waste so much time on me.
Wow.
What a strange mind you have for going where you did. What pathetic fantasies you have.
House Republicans subpoena do ents from N.Y., Mass. in Exxon climate change probe
House Republicans led by Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas issued subpoenas Wednesday to New York and Massachusetts attorneys general over the ongoing probe into whether Exxon Mobil lied to the public and its shareholders about climate change.
“The AGs have appointed themselves to determine what is valid and what is invalid about climate change.
It’s at the expense of scientists’ right to free speech,”
said the San Antonio Congressman.
“These investigations amount to a form of extortion.”
Schneiderman and Healey have refused, citing the 10th Amendment’s protection of state’s rights. A spokeswoman for Healey said Wednesday their office was still considering next steps. Schneiderman’s office indicated it would fight the subpoena.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/07/13/h...-change-probe/
If you accuse me of lying, you better expect that I might spend a bit of time on it.
To be honest, it took very little time to show how stupid your comment was. Most of your bull is just as easy to pick apart.
If you really think that then what does that make you?
You two are often one in the same in reasoniong. Random is far more intelligent than you Fuzzy, but you both let your preconceived notions go untested, and fail in not trying to understand the facts.
what 'facts,' dimwit?
Oh yes please.
Please show us your facts!
https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/climate/
Your turn, dimwit.
What's wrong?
Aren't you smart enough to find the relevant material?
It's all relevant and been shown to you before. Regardless, you are the one that said facts were being ignored, chicken .
Yet you think its funny to link a whole site section. Not a specific page in the site.
Do you realize how pathetic you are for such actions?
Not nearly as much as accusing others of ignoring facts and then trying this ploy, chicken .
Funny thing is, you never care if what I say is true or not. You aromatically label it as false.
That says volumes about your integrity, intelligence, and ethics!
You have anything substantive to say or you just going to try these mindless universals? I think you are an idiot with poor critical thinking skills. That doesn't mean a blind squirrel cannot sometimes find a nut, dimwit.
Please...
You have anything substantive to say or you just going to try these mindless universals? I think you are an idiot with poor critical thinking skills. That doesn't mean a blind squirrel cannot sometimes find a nut, dimwit.
It's rude to talk into the mirror.
Here Are 7 Terrifying Charts That Show Exactly What We’re Doing to the Planet
The world is careening towards an environment never experienced before by humans, with the temperature of the air and oceans breaking records, sea levels reaching historic highs and carbon dioxide surpassing a key milestone, a major international report has found.
The "state of the climate" report, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration with input from hundreds of scientists from 62 countries, confirmed there was a "toppling of several symbolic mileposts" in heat, sea level rise and extreme weather in 2015.
"The impacts of climate change are no longer subtle," Michael Mann, a leading climatologist at Penn State, told the Guardian. "They are playing out before us, in real time. The 2015 numbers drive that home."
http://www.motherjones.com/environme...-state-climate
Meanwhile, VRWC/ALEC/BigCarbon /red/slave states:
EPA’s Efforts To Curb Methane Emissions Suffers A Setback As 13 States Sue
Thirteen states have sued the Obama administration over the EPA’s new rules for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry.
The lawsuit, filed by West Virginia and backed by twelve other states, argues that the new rules are unnecessary and would add burdensome costs for oil and gas producers.
“This is yet another example of unlawful federal overreach jeopardizing West Virginia jobs and working families,” Morrisey said in a statement. “The rules are a solution in search of a problem and ignore the industry’s success in voluntarily reducing methane emissions from these sources to a 30-year low.”
The rule, finalized in May, would limit methane emissions from new oil and gas infrastructure, and would require operators to submit to semi-annual or quarterly monitoring. Under the new rule, the EPA estimates that emissions from existing oil and gas operations would drop by 11 million tons of CO2 equivalent annually by 2025 — the equivalent of taking more than 2 million cars off the road.
The thirteen-state lawsuit -- which includes
Alabama, Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wisconsin, as well as state departments in Kentucky and North Carolina --
is not the first time the methane rules have been challenged in court. North Dakota, which saw huge financial benefits during its oil boom a few years ago, filed its own lawsuit in July.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...tates-lawsuit/
U.S. States Signed Pact to Keep Exxon Climate Probe Confidential
The oil company was investigated over allegedly misleading the public about climate change
A pact that 15 U.S. states signed to jointly investigate Exxon Mobil Corp for allegedly misleading the public about climate change sought to keep prosecutors' deliberations confidential and was broadly written so they could probe other fossil fuel companies.
The "Climate Change Coalition Common Interest Agreement" was signed by state attorneys general in May, two months after they held a press conference to say they would go after Exxon, the world's largest publicly-traded oil and gas company, and possibly other companies.
The signed agreement has not been made public until now, and Reuters reviewed a copy of it on Thursday.
It provides considerably more detail about the prosecutors' legal strategy than the general outline provided at their announcement in March, which was headlined by former Vice President Al Gore.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-confidential/
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
