Do People Still Believe In Global Warming?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Has it? What are you defining as the warming trend? I see it as 1750 to present day. Different papers have different values, but they all show relatively little change since around 1950, and an increase since 1750:




Yet to date, there is no math formula released that shows warming from CO2 in an atmospheric mix.

Again, there is more than 50 timers more H2O in the lower troposphere than CO2. Please show me the math that shows how CO2 makes any notable difference.

The front page of the site wilddumbass got that from has for a header:

Exploring Theosophy

The Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy
David Pratt's Homepage

This is the same type of he go that a solar 'burp' caused the great flood. Explaining to him what that much hydrogen combustion throughout the atmosphere would do was entertaining.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Did you watch the Youtube, or not?

[spurraider21]

No Sherlock ? Issue is not on the fact it happened before, issues are on the fact it's probably not natural and the pace is much faster. Other issue being ocean level affecting desert lands thousand years ago and now it's affecting potentially entire cities and millions of people. With 8 or 9 billion people consequences of climate changes are much more impactful. Screw a rice harvest and you will see the consequences.

not sure we can measure the pace of hundreds of thousdands of years ago. we have only measured the pace of it for about 100 years, and we can't really compare it to past eras since they study those in much larger timescales

[Wild Cobra]

No he hasn't. He is regurgitating something else as he is wont to do. Bertrand Russell has a quote that describes WC to a tee.



He used to claim that they didn't consider black carbon. Now he claims they don't consider water or feedback cycles. He is a dumb that doesn't even know what the parts he changes do.

You sure are guilty at what you accuse others of. Worse yet, you lie about my point of view. I never said they don't consider solar or soot, and if I ever did, it was a misspeak that you won't let go of, and I have countless said otherwise.

My related points are they do not consider the indirect solar changes. Only direct, and that they have low balled soot. I have repeatedly said they have been increasing the soot estimate as time goes by.

I really wish you would stop being a chronic liar.

People see it. Don't you realize you have no credibility?

[Wild Cobra]

The front page of the site wilddumbass got that from has for a header:

Exploring Theosophy

The Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy
David Pratt's Homepage

This is the same type of he go that a solar 'burp' caused the great flood. Explaining to him what that much hydrogen combustion throughout the atmosphere would do was entertaining.

Does it matter where I got the image to, when i am pointing out the graphs from the works of Hoyt, Lean, Wang, Svalgaard, etc. etc?

I liked the compiled graph which is an accurate representation of these peoples works, so I used it and linked the site.

Are you so dumb, or do you think others here are so dumb, that they don't see the way you obfuscate things?

[Brazil]

not sure we can measure the pace of hundreds of thousdands of years ago. we have only measured the pace of it for about 100 years, and we can't really compare it to past eras since they study those in much larger timescales

Not sure I'm able to contest the work of hundreds of scientists.

At the end what's the point ? Are you implying human activities have no impact on global climatic trends or just saying we are not sure... The fact our industries and agriculture release tons of everywhere is an issue. People saying there is no correlation uses that to justify the do nothing and continue to up.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You sure are guilty at what you accuse others of. Worse yet, you lie about my point of view. I never said they don't consider solar or soot, and if I ever did, it was a misspeak that you won't let go of, and I have countless said otherwise.

My related points are they do not consider the indirect solar changes. Only direct, and that they have low balled soot. I have repeatedly said they have been increasing the soot estimate as time goes by.

I really wish you would stop being a chronic liar.

People see it. Don't you realize you have no credibility?

You can claim that I have no credibility but I am not the one that gets multiple people everyday telling me how dumb I am.

misspeak

Did you misspeak when you said warming drives CO2?

Ignorant sophist are you.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Does it matter where I got the image to, when i am pointing out the graphs from the works of Hoyt, Lean, Wang, Svalgaard, etc. etc?

I liked the compiled graph which is an accurate representation of these peoples works, so I used it and linked the site.

Are you so dumb, or do you think others here are so dumb, that they don't see the way you obfuscate things?

obfuscate. you don't even know what it means.

If you do not think the credibility of a source is an issue then you are a fool.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

WAIT!!!

another WC classic:

the ocean is like a giant soda, fizzing.

And befoer you start whining about bullies keep in mind that you get it because you say stupid, mind-numbingly ignorant . Stop that and you will stop getting the 'picked on.'

[Wild Cobra]

obfuscate. you don't even know what it means.

If you do not think the credibility of a source is an issue then you are a fool.

The source is Lean, Hoyt, etc.

Are you questioning their peer reviewed works? I simply used a graphic of their combined work from someone else. I'm sorry you are so stupid, but that's not my fault.

This thread is about global warming. Once again you are so obsessed about me, you make it about me. How many threads have you made about me now? I lost track. When will your obsessions stop?

I would suggest if you aren't going to add value to this thread, that you leave.

[spurraider21]

Not sure I'm able to contest the work of hundreds of scientists.

At the end what's the point ? Are you implying human activities have no impact on global climatic trends or just saying we are not sure... The fact our industries and agriculture release tons of everywhere is an issue. People saying there is no correlation uses that to justify the do nothing and continue to up.

the latter, we can't be sure how much of an impact we have. we've been doing advanced global temperature studies for less than 50 years yet we are so certain we are having a drastic effect. when we talk about studies of previous ice ages, they can't study such small time scales (less than 50 or 100 years) accurately at all. so its hard to compare them tbh.

[spurraider21]

an emoticon is an interesting answer to a yes or no question, tbh

[Brazil]

the latter, we can't be sure how much of an impact we have. we've been doing advanced global temperature studies for less than 50 years yet we are so certain we are having a drastic effect. when we talk about studies of previous ice ages, they can't study such small time scales (less than 50 or 100 years) accurately at all. so its hard to compare them tbh.

Again even if not sure even if if do you imply human activities have no effect ? Let's say you answer we are not sure is that a reason to do nothing ?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

the latter, we can't be sure how much of an impact we have. we've been doing advanced global temperature studies for less than 50 years yet we are so certain we are having a drastic effect. when we talk about studies of previous ice ages, they can't study such small time scales (less than 50 or 100 years) accurately at all. so its hard to compare them tbh.

this is like creationists saying we can't prove how old the planet is because we haven't been around that long

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The source is Lean, Hoyt, etc.

Are you questioning their peer reviewed works? I simply used a graphic of their combined work from someone else. I'm sorry you are so stupid, but that's not my fault.

This thread is about global warming. Once again you are so obsessed about me, you make it about me. How many threads have you made about me now? I lost track. When will your obsessions stop?

I would suggest if you aren't going to add value to this thread, that you leave.

No a graph from there may have been but the compilation of bull that you are regurgitating comes from that guy.

For anyone else who wants to see for themselves its found @ http://davidpratt.info/climatecon2.htm

It's about 10 graphs taken from academic works with that guys 'interpretations.'

Heres another gem from WC's guy led

http://davidpratt.info/aids.htm

HIV=AIDS=Death: A Killer Myth

And of course we need UFO's

http://davidpratt.info/ufo1.htm

[Brazil]

this is like creationists saying we can't prove how old the planet is because we haven't been around that long

Mouse is not a creationist not sure what he is either

[FuzzyLumpkins]

an emoticon is an interesting answer to a yes or no question, tbh

What is the emoticon of and what do think that action is to.

[Wild Cobra]

WAIT!!!

another WC classic:

the ocean is like a giant soda, fizzing.

And befoer you start whining about bullies keep in mind that you get it because you say stupid, mind-numbingly ignorant . Stop that and you will stop getting the 'picked on.'

I see you are one who believes if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

I never said that... liar...

I sad:

Carbon dioxide is in soft drinks. Notice how the carbon dioxide stays longer in them when they stay cold, but if you open a warm one up, it may fizz like crazy? More gas dissolves in cold water than warm water.

Again.

When will you stop lying?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I see you are one who believes if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.

I never said that... liar...

I sad:



Again.

When will you stop lying?

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post5458330

below the first graph you say

The ocean is like a soda, going flat.

This is like when I called you on all that racist and you called me a liar. Now people have sigs of my collage of WC racism.

It's sad you cannot even keep up with your own .

[Wild Cobra]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post5458330

below the first graph you say



This is like when I called you on all that racist and you called me a liar. Now people have sigs of my collage of WC racism.

It's sad you cannot even keep up with your own .

So you agree. I didn't say it fizzes...

I think we are making progress. You can now acknowledge that you lie!

[spurraider21]

this is like creationists saying we can't prove how old the planet is because we haven't been around that long

no, its nothing like that. we know very well how long ago we had ice ages. we can also study co2 levels by studying gas bubbles in the arctic shelves. that's not at all what i am insinuating. what i'm saying is, we can't study historical climates a small sample like a 50 year span to compare it to our 50 year span of advanced climate studies.

[spurraider21]

Again even if not sure even if if do you imply human activities have no effect ? Let's say you answer we are not sure is that a reason to do nothing ?

i don't understand your phrasing for a majority of this post tbh. do i think we should do nothing? not at all. we have technological means to improve our "green efforts" and i'm fine with us taking those steps. but these apoctolypic statements regarding climate change or how if we don't change now the earth as we know it will be destroyed are asinine imo

[Wild Cobra]

no, its nothing like that. we know very well how long ago we had ice ages. we can also study co2 levels by studying gas bubbles in the arctic shelves. that's not at all what i am insinuating. what i'm saying is, we can't study historical climates a small sample like a 50 year span to compare it to our 50 year span of advanced climate studies.

Worse yet, ice core CO2 samples are an average of 1460 years apart, and the newest Vostok is about 300 BC. It takes time for the ice to be compacted to give a usable sample.

Alarmists don't like to hear this, but statistical analysis has the probability really low of detecting a 50 year blip in the ice.

NOAA dot gov link: NOAA CO2 core data

[Wild Cobra]

[Brazil]

i don't understand your phrasing for a majority of this post tbh. do i think we should do nothing? not at all. we have technological means to improve our "green efforts" and i'm fine with us taking those steps. but these apoctolypic statements regarding climate change or how if we don't change now the earth as we know it will be destroyed are asinine imo

You got my phrasing right.

So now here we are, we all agree we have to do something. What sense of emergency we want to put in it? Let's pray you are right and actual predictions are wrong, we have time, oil companies are happy and republicans are happy too, Kyoto is good for European but not for American....

now if you are wrong ?