Reply With Quote
Spam
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/ipdf/10.1021/es504574v
Comment on “Scientists’ Views about Attribution of Global Warming”
A rebuttal of same.José L. Duarte*
Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States
Environ. Sci. Technol., 2014, 48 (23), pp 14057–14058
DOI: 10.1021/es504574v
Publication Date (Web): November 18, 2014
Copyright © 2014 American Chemical Society
Spam
She seems nice.
Copy/paste from https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
Amazed you found that even after RG linked his source way above
That was the source.
It systematically picks apart the pseudoscientific bull that people like you push.
If I recall, I solidly shot down everything yo said before on the topic.
You are just a blathering idiot.
Yes, a nice neat write-up by the bloggers that leaves out relevant facts, and projects incorrect conclusion.
Called it. Claimed victory and called me stupid.
When I call you stupid it is because you don't understand how the parts you change work, struggle to read with comprehension, lack the critical thinking skills to discern nuance, and struggle to learn simple concepts even after having gone over them repeatedly.
That is not a big deal. People such as yourself are legion but what sets you apart is you think you're not. It's why you are mocked so readily.
You have nothing here. You cannot even reframe the arguments we had before. And never mind the 6 other studies you don't have denial blogs to try and regurgitate their rebuttals.
That is what is actually amusing about you, watching your dumb ass stumble through trying to read what they say and put it into your own words. I understand why you don't do it anymore but in light of that you really should not be calling anyone stupid. Pot, kettle, that whole thing.
Got caught didn't ya, Lump.
Serves ya right. ha, ha.
Says the guy who doesn't post relevant facts and projects his own conclusion.
What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
Relevant facts were not left out, and the conclusion of the experts was correct.
THE BAD AT SCIENCE GUY: Bill Nye Tries to Link Global Warming To Hurricanes, Fails Basic Hurricane Science
Speaking with Dan Rather on Sirius XM, Bill Nye, The Bad-At-Science Guy, argued that the hurricanes the U.S. is experiencing have been strengthened by global warming.
Rather precipitated Nye’s odyssey into absurdity by prompting, “Any doubt in your mind that climate change is contributing to both the increased number of hurricanes and the strength of the hurricanes?”
Nye pontificated:
Well, it’s the strength that is almost certainly associated with global warming. Now, everybody, global warming and climate change are the same thing. As the world gets warmer and there’s more energy in the atmosphere, you expect storms to get stronger. You also expect ocean currents to not flow the way they always have, and that will make some places cooler and some places warmer.
The problem in southeast United States and Mexico is that these hurricanes are very powerful, and as I say all the time, they’re very expensive. We are all gonna pay for Harvey; we are all gonna pay for Irma, one way or the other. And so I want, I would prefer, as a guy born in the U.S., got my engineering degree and my license in the U.S., worked in aerospace for over twenty years in the U.S., I would like the United States to be the world leader in addressing this, rather than the World Sit-On-Its-Handsers. So anyway, the more heat energy in the atmosphere strengthens the storms, Dan.
PhD meteorologist Ryan Maue, fed up, issued a succinct reply to point out a flaw in Nye’s analysis:
he widely-propounded idea that global warming is causing either more hurricanes or making existing hurricanes more powerful flies in the face of this fact, as the Washington Examiner reported:
After Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005, some climate modelers predicted such storms would be more frequent in a warmer world, while others predicted the opposite, and still others said there was no connection between warming and hurricanes. What ensued was an historically unprecedented 12-year absence of major (category 3 or higher) hurricanes making landfall in the United States, until Harvey, which ties for 14th-most intense hurricane since 1851. The events after 2005 were "consistent with" some projections, but any other events would have been as well.
Nye's remarks below:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/20769/...-hank-berrien#
Yes bill nye is the voice of climate science
[Irma] generated enough ac ulated cyclone energy — the total wind energy generated over a storm's lifetime — to meet the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's definition of an average full Atlantic hurricane season
Gotta laugh at climate change fanatics when Bill "Cue Card Reader Guy" Nye is the face of the movement. Dude is as much a legit figure as Trump is. Not a denier, but having this toad as the face of the movement is just as whom the POTUS is.
Nye is vastly more scientifically literate and intelligent than Trump.
I don't think anyone describes him as the "face of the movement", including Nye. He just speaks, as honestly as he can, about scientific issues like this. He is by no means an expert on the subject.
That is simply someone doing a bad ad hominem. (i.e. this guy made a mistake, so the idea he is talking about is false").
[Irma] generated enough ac ulated cyclone energy — the total wind energy generated over a storm's lifetime — to meet the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's definition of an average full Atlantic hurricane season
The guy is all over the place and has said some really, really stupid things.
See what I did there?
Bill Nye is a leader in the climate change movement like Sean hannity is a conservative leader
ie a mouthpiece
I am still getting adjusted to wearing reading glasses.
When do we get to say "yeah we are doing it"?
How much evidence do you need?
I said Im not a denier. I said I laugh at the fanatics of the movement because Meterologist Trump is the talking head.I am still getting adjusted to wearing reading glasses.
When do we get to say "yeah we are doing it"?
How much evidence do you need?
ah. Got it.
I have always said that the evidence will pile up either way, and it is looking like we are seeing the effects a bit sooner than I expected.
The thing that bugs me the most is that the people who want to deny anything is happening also claim that addressing the problem will cause some huge economic harm, which is also easy to disprove.
Fixing things not only isn't harmful, it helps. Seems like getting off our asses is a no-brainer, IMO.
More storms, more extremes was predicted. This is happening now.
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Posting Permissions
