Reply With Quote
Specific enough? Yes.
Accurate enough?not even close
The same thing driving the current warming trend on Mars. The Sun.
Specific enough?
Specific enough? Yes.
Accurate enough?
It's certainly more accurate than the models predicting anthropogenic clobal climate change causing the end of the world as we know it.Specific enough? Yes.
Accurate enough?
Heck, even the most die-hard alarmists have had to admit they've missed the mark.
Yep. There's more evidence the Sun is causing our warming than there is man is the culprit.
Sorry but, with all the temperature records being falsified, left and right, there's no assurance your unattributed picture of squiggly lines is a true representation of anything other than the ability to link an image.
"The sun" has been an awful explanation basically since the 60's. We are also at a low point in the current solar/sunspot cycle
Well that's awfully convenient
Fine, why don't you produce a more accurate source that tracks solar irradiance over the relevant time period
None of the temperature records have been falsified to my knowledge.
Feel free to prove that to a reasonable degree any time.
The Sun isn't the cause of the warming trend. Its output, although the cause of warmth of our planet, really hasn't varied much for a long time.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 11-02-2017 at 08:35 AM.
Asking someone who buys into pseudoscience to do their own data is a mugs game. Good luck with that. Cue Wattsupwiththat BS in 3, 2, 1...Well that's awfully convenient
Fine, why don't you produce a more accurate source that tracks solar irradiance over the relevant time period
All those climate scientists are in it for the money, and the trillion dollar fossil fuel industry... isn't.1.The pseudo-scientist considers himself a genius.
2.He regards other researchers as stupid, dishonest or both. By choice or necessity he operates outside the peer review system (hence the le of the original Antioch Review article, "The Hermit Scientist").
3.He believes there is a campaign against his ideas, a campaign compared with the persecution of Galileo or Pasteur.
4.Instead of side-stepping the mainstream, the pseudo-scientist attacks it head-on: The most revered scientist is Einstein so Gardner writes that Einstein is the most likely establishment figure to be attacked.
5.He coins neologisms. ["new words", in this case meant to sound as scientific as possible-RG]
just gonna beat Chris to the punch and put this up before he posts the mentioned article, claims victory, and runs away
the oligarchy hiring s to prove AGW is a myth, a hoax, an anti-Capitalist conspiracy, and/or natural is one of the fundamental, suicidal insanities dominating American and ing up the planet
It's not about claiming victory. There's the truth, and then there's spin. You often lean towards the latter, so you need correction. You're welcome.
Generally warmer weather, more extreme weather events, etc.
Seems fairly accurate to me.
Even the most die-hard denier has to admit that rapid change can lead to unintended, and often unpleasant consequences.
... and you keep LOL-ing
This is called the horse laugh fallacy by the way. The OP says that people like you apply deeply flawed reasoning to this topic. Thanks again.
Your derision does not falsify anything, other than the statement "Wild Cobra has credibility"
You post youtubes of non scientists talking about globalist plots. I post peer-reviewed scientific work or videos that meticulously cite to them
It's like arguing with anti-vaxxers. Almost a decade later and the OP stands the test of time.
Believe as you wish. I research the truth. You use confirmation bias.
oops...better stop before I wear that out.
You sound just like every conspiracy theorist I have ever tangled with.
And it feeds into the OP. "everyone else is an idiot, I alone have figured out the TRUTH".
Thanks again for keeping the quality of your posts low enough to be easily fit into my narrative.
No sense in wasting my time making better posts here. This site has become a center for losers. If you notice, my posts here are far less than they once were.
Beside. Nobody here is intelligent enough to understand the facts of the sciences involved.
Not a horse laugh fallacy.
Sorry. Feel free to do enough reading to understand it. Not that I think you will bother doing any actual work.
"nobody is smart enough to understand my genius"
OP.
Thanks again. You can stop now. Really, you have provided more than enough evidence for my hypothesis.
White House OKs report warning climate change caused by humans
The US government released Friday a major scientific report that says
climate change is "extremely likely" to be caused by human activity and will get worse without major cuts to carbon emissions.
The findings of the federally mandated report were approved by the White House, even though they are starkly at odds with the position of President Donald Trump, who has labeled global warming a Chinese hoax and named fossil fuel ally Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency.
The Climate Science Special Report spans more than 600 pages and is part of a larger report known as the Fourth National Climate Assessment, which is being issued in draft form for public comment.
Based on "a large body of scientific, peer-reviewed research," global annually averaged surface air temperature has increased by about 1.8 Fahrenheit (1.0 Celsius) over the last 115 years (1901–2016), it says.
"This period is now the warmest in the history of modern civilization,"
said the report, available at science2017.globalchange.gov.
Since the last report of its kind was issued in 2014,
"stronger evidence has emerged for continuing, rapid, human-caused warming of the global atmosphere and ocean," the text said.
"It is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century,"
the report added, noting there "is no convincing alternative explanation."
https://phys.org/news/2017-11-white-...te-humans.html
what kind of off argues AGW with WC?
I'm totally surprised this report wasn't suppressed by Trash's Ministry of Truth.
I asked you to prove it. You have no credibility to assert anything anymore. Going down the rabbit hole has repeatedly show a whole heap of stupid.
The BEST analysis' whole thing was to show using spectrum analysis that the cycles had changed. They included all the ocean and solar cycles taht you like to wave your hands at. We already went over that extensively a couple few years ago.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
