Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yet that was not the discussion we were specifically having. I remember me claiming there was a divergence. I even stated that it did not mean it is a down trend, but that it has diverged from the previous trend.
Look, you can quibble all you want in the effort to save face. The discussion is regarding human caused global warming, and the specific discussion was whether or not sea levels were rising. The trends are what they are and your reference actually directly contradicted the very rationale for your pointing out the fluctuation of the last two years.
That you now want to parse further and rescue a tiny technical victory out of your comprehensive conceptual failure is just... well... cute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander
So, be well, we are done.
Oh, we were done a long time ago. But like Ivar Giaever who took four years to realize he should be mad at the American Physical Society, you just have taken a while to realize it.
Sorry, I am not interested in proving to you what is common knowledge to anyone who has even a basic knowledge of the issues involved in climate change.
That should actually be "what is common knowledge to anyone who has even a basic knowledge of the issues involved in climate change" except of course for 98% of the professionals in the field.
That's what I don't get about deniers: What if THEY are wrong? Clearly nobody is infallible, but if deniers start to consider, even for a second, what the consequences are, then the above quote starts to apply....
When al gore is caught with bold faced lies it's sorta kinda hard to believe him...
We can, and do affect the planet on a daily basis. We've cleared billions of acres of forest for agriculture, blasted off mountain tops and dug enormous pits in search of fossil fuels, metals and minerals, fished and hunted hundreds of species into total or near extinction, drilled into the earth and taken countless amounts of oil and natural gas, created mines deep into the earth that change the water content of the rocks, stability of the region, etc. To say that humans have no impact on the planet is absolutely ludicrous and shows how little you know about the subject.
In the Earth's past, we had no oxygen in our oceans or atmosphere. Then came photosynthetic organisms, which, in the billions, altered our earth forever. How can you think that humans, who also number in the billions, are incapable of the same?
I'm wondering if you've ever flown over the United States....and seen the wide open, untouched lands. How much do humans occupy of that land mass?
I guess since we've taken "countless" amounts of oil and gas, you'll be one of the first to give up all the amenities procured from those resources, right?
Yeah, humans supposedly have caused to the to burn.......1/2 degree in the last 150 years.
As the expert who just resigned from the APS said, that indicates an extremely STABLE climate.
You DO know the climate changes, don't you?
Can you tell me what the ideal temperature of the Earth would be?
To suggest humans can change or prevent the Earth from cooling OR heating is patently ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
That should actually be "what is common knowledge to anyone who has even a basic knowledge of the issues involved in climate change" except of course for 98% of the professionals in the field.
FIFY
Again with the bogus 98%?
You DO know that 98% comes from a FEW HUNDRED scientists that responded to the survey?
Quote:
The discussion is regarding human caused global warming, and the specific discussion was whether or not sea levels were rising.
Actually, the discussion is about The Goreacle's last gasp fear mongering for a dying planet.
You DO know that 98% comes from a FEW HUNDRED scientists that responded to the survey?
Actually, no. I know for a fact that it was from several hundred authors of several thousand research papers who were not surveyed at all, but whose published work was reviewed in a meta-study.
"Can you tell me what the ideal temperature of the Earth would be?"
I've asked globals this question over and over and have never gotten an answer.
I've also wondered why they never bring up all the nuclear testing done from the '50's to late '70's. Could this have any effect on things? All I get is crickets. If driving an SUV could then I'd think blowing up nuclear weapons could.
Actually, no. I know for a fact that it was from several hundred authors of several thousand research papers who were not surveyed at all, but whose published work was reviewed in a meta-study.
Nonsense. A few hundred from deep within the bowels of the cabal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
A stable one.
Stable? I'd say 1/2 a degree over 150 years IS stable.
Or perhaps you think the temperature should remain static?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
