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.
I am not even remotely convinced of anthropogenic climate change, but seeing these threads making simplistic, off-base, and ill-informed arguments against it is pitiful in a faintly amusing way.
It only amuses you because you don't respond to it, which is probably for the best.
We still have people convinced that they're geniuses because they think warming and cooling 'just happens' and there is no specific cause for any of it.
You didn't bother to read the paper I linked to did you?
June 4th 2015.... The rate of global warming during the last 15 years has been as fast as the warming seen during the last half of the 20th Century, according to new study published in Science this month by scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). A Pause In Global Warming? Not Really - Forbes
Plus this... There is strong evidence that global sea level is now rising at an increased rate and will continue to rise during this century. Is sea level rising?
"The new study used the latest global surface temperature data and other improvements in the quality of the observed record."
Improvements to the observed record?
They could come right out and say, "yeah, we cooked the numbers five different ways from sundown...it`s all bull****" and there would still be warmers quoting the new study!
You keep on with this ship's seawater cooling system temperatures...What nonsense, as the engine temperatures are thermostatically controlled to 160 degrees F and above.
Why were ARGOS buoys disregarded for ships seawater temps. Your scientists arbitrarily did that.
To be fair, it says the the United States is in a cooling trend, but not the world. [...]
So yeah, the PLANET is not cooling. So this thread is absolutely awful. I'm hoping by pointing this out, we can all let this thread die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
So did someone place a geodesic dome over the US and thus defy the laws of thermodynamics?
Redshadowz made an excellent point back on page 1, and he is correct. This thread was stupid from the very start and should have died immediately. But since it will probably go for 60+ pages, I'd like to ask a question to those of your who would call yourself "climate skeptics":
Do you see the flaw in hawkeye2009's post? Would you be willing to explain to him why a cooling trend in one part of the world does not imply that global warming, as a whole, has stopped?
Various science-mined folks have already explained this, but I am specifically interested in responses from the climate skeptics. Do you see the glaring disconnect between the title of this thread and the claim that the US is in a cooling trend?
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 06-16-2015 at 07:03 AM..
To quote myself and it drives the warmers nuts because it can't be disproved is that the earth heats and cools periodically.
Yes, and people die all the time, therefore if I was to shoot you your death would be natural and not manmade so no one could arrest me for it.
That one should also drive the warmers nuts because it's exactly the same logic that you've used to make them look so stupid over and over in these AGW threads.
As you claim to think for yourself I'm curious as to what methodology or studies you have made on the climate to refute the scientists findings,basing your opinions on the likes of the ops rightwing link is a rather vacuous source of information compared to scientific publications from NASA and NOAA etc. http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
I will address the first of your two links, which is an article published by NASA supporting and promoting the "97% consensus" lie. This is one of my favorite things to talk about on this subject.
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.
This is a flat out lie. Moreover, it has been widely known for quite a while now that this proposition is not supported by the facts, yet NASA continues to promote this blatantly false propaganda anyway.
As we can see, NASA, an agency of the US Government, has outed themselves as propagandists and are publishing and promoting falsehoods and lies on this topic at this very moment, and as a result cannot be trusted on this. What in the world is the US space agency doing getting involved in a politically charged debate on the climate, anyway?
They do quote a study by John Cook that sampled articles on climate change as a proxy for what either "all scientists" or "all climate scientists" believe, but this study does not even purport to support the conclusion that you, and NASA and the other environmental extremists claim that it does. Here is a link to that study, which I encourage you to read, and then we can discuss it further if you like:
So, as you can see, this study does not actually even purport to support this hypothesis. Rather, after repeating this lie for many years, the AGW extremists have just adopted this study as the closest thing to support for this false proposition they can find. And I have looked, there is none better.
But of course if you can produce a scientific, statistically sound poll that has been conducted showing that 97% of either "all scientists" or "all climate scientists" support the AGW alarmism hypothesis, we would all like to see it. But you cannot do it because it does not exist.
NASA either knows this and is knowingly lying or is ignorant of it and is demonstrating their lack of reliability by their negligent promotion of lies on this topic. In either case, they are not a reliable or trustworthy source on this subject.
And the 97% claim is as brazen a lie as is being frequently repeated anywhere in the world today.
Last edited by Spartacus713; 06-16-2015 at 07:52 AM..
: an impartial attitude of the mind previous to investigation
Watts opposes every single conclusion made by all of the mainstream scientific sources and if it doesn't fit into his agenda he denies it, mocks it or intentionally misinterprets it to mislead people like you. Have you ever once seen anything on his blog that suggests that warming is real and the implications will be negative?
Automatically opposing every single conclusion made by the most qualified climatologists in the world does not make you a skeptic, it makes you a denier. They may be wrong from time to time, but Watts doesn't oppose them for that reason-- he opposes them because he is being paid to oppose them.
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.
