Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Global Warming is over.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    THIS is whats wrong with climate change



    The USA has sooooooooooo much money we can't wait to give it away
    “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
    Sir Winston Churchill

    Comment


      Originally posted by gwb72tii View Post
      aaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

      well herbie, the rate of change has been zero to negative for the last 12 years

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...882984274.html
      Actually that's not true. But who am I to argue with a prestigious WSJ editorial. I'm going to go plant my tomatoe plants now, a month earlier than normal. Should be a good year for vegetables.
      sigpic

      Comment


        Originally posted by herbivor View Post
        Actually that's not true. But who am I to argue with a prestigious WSJ editorial. I'm going to go plant my tomatoe plants now, a month earlier than normal. Should be a good year for vegetables.
        open your eyes herb
        i purposely quoted the Princeton Professor since he's not funded by oil
        but he must be a "faux" scientist also

        not only is it true that there has been no warming for over ten years from actual atmospheric data, you're scientists have been caught in email exchanges wondering how to hide/explain the data since it conflicts with their warming models

        as the professor said, when your postulations are not supported, or are contradicted in this case, by the data, you have FAIL
        “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
        Sir Winston Churchill

        Comment


          So basically herb tries to support this by science but when science doesn't support his claims then it's bullocks. Righteous.


          "Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed."

          John F. Kennedy

          Comment


            Originally posted by HarryPotter View Post
            So basically herb tries to support this by science but when science doesn't support his claims then it's bullocks. Righteous.
            Not at all. It's just that what they are presenting as science, isn't really science, though it's being sold to them as science. Just compare the link Farbin provided to the actual science journal I linked a few posts above. Can you spot the differences?
            sigpic

            Comment


              Stop arguing and just get on with it.

              Winter's coming!
              sigpic

              Comment


                Originally posted by herbivor View Post
                Not at all. It's just that what they are presenting as science, isn't really science, though it's being sold to them as science. Just compare the link Farbin provided to the actual science journal I linked a few posts above. Can you spot the differences?
                no, what you argue is not science, its the credibility of the opinion's source
                there is no science that supports AGW, it is theory
                and unfortunately for your side, almost no data that supports the theory
                but apparently the theory is emough to convince you and others, but not everyone
                when atmospheric scientists argue against AGW, they're deniers
                deniers of what exactly? and unproven theory? conjecture by scientists sucking off the teat of taxpayers?
                “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                Sir Winston Churchill

                Comment


                  this just in
                  Global Cooling on the way..........seriously

                  Don’t discard those flannel long johns just yet. There’s every indication that you are going to need them over the next many years.
                  “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                  Sir Winston Churchill

                  Comment


                    "But Forbes is an evil capitalist, not a credible resource." -herbivor

                    Comment


                      It snowed in Portland last week...in March. The sky is falling Liberals are getting more and more fun to laugh at.
                      Your signature picture has been removed since it contained the Photobucket "upgrade your account" image.

                      "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the [federal] government." ~ James Madison

                      ‎"If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen" Barack Obama

                      Comment


                        Just out of curiosity how much and what kind of evidence is required to convince you that GW is anthropogenic? Because you are at least admitting that GW is occurring (which your side was completely denying only a few years ago). But now what do you require to convince its man-made.
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by herbivor View Post
                          Just out of curiosity how much and what kind of evidence is required to convince you that GW is anthropogenic? Because you are at least admitting that GW is occurring (which your side was completely denying only a few years ago). But now what do you require to convince its man-made.
                          let's start here
                          and I'll round up on numbers
                          anthro CO2 is 4% of annual CO2 emissions
                          IPCC et al want 20% reduction in anthro CO2
                          so if we gag and follow IPCC, wreck global economies etc, we get a net reduction of less than 1% in total annual CO2 emissions
                          and you're telling me that this is the answer
                          even though your models have not, so far, predicted anything accurately

                          as for a theory vs data, your models seek to predict the future based on a theory
                          no one will know until the future comes. eh?
                          so far yor side is batting 0.00
                          but you could still be right and we need to act now, correct?

                          but what if you're not correct?
                          “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                          Sir Winston Churchill

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by gwb72tii View Post
                            there is no science that supports AGW
                            Not sure if serious.

                            And you a layman cannot argue that less than 1% of a change will not be significant. In a lot of ecological systems, a 1% spike is monumental and reflects so in the species present. What puts you in a position to attempt to discredit real scientists who in fact say that small of a change would indeed have a serious impact, your unaccredited guess? Bold, real fucking bold.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by cale View Post
                              Not sure if serious.

                              And you a layman cannot argue that less than 1% of a change will not be significant. In a lot of ecological systems, a 1% spike is monumental and reflects so in the species present. What puts you in a position to attempt to discredit real scientists who in fact say that small of a change would indeed have a serious impact, your unaccredited guess? Bold, real fucking bold.
                              try reading up on the issue cale before you make yourself look foolish. again.
                              “There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
                              Sir Winston Churchill

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by gwb72tii View Post
                                let's start here
                                and I'll round up on numbers
                                anthro CO2 is 4% of annual CO2 emissions
                                IPCC et al want 20% reduction in anthro CO2
                                so if we gag and follow IPCC, wreck global economies etc, we get a net reduction of less than 1% in total annual CO2 emissions
                                and you're telling me that this is the answer
                                even though your models have not, so far, predicted anything accurately

                                as for a theory vs data, your models seek to predict the future based on a theory
                                no one will know until the future comes. eh?
                                so far yor side is batting 0.00
                                but you could still be right and we need to act now, correct?

                                but what if you're not correct?
                                None of that word salad answers my question. What evidence do you need that would convince you?
                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X