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.
When I look at the funny chart the thing that should pop out to all is the general direction of prediction and acutal climate movement.
A downward turn is not a and indication that the predicions were incorrect. If in 10 years, the line trends upward again... and the overall trend is upward, is the science then correct and irrefutable?
When I look at the funny chart the thing that should pop out to all is the general direction of prediction and acutal climate movement.
A downward turn is not a and indication that the predictions were incorrect. If in 10 years, the line trends upward again... and the overall trend is upward, is the science then correct and irrefutable?
We have 10 of the hottest years in the past 15 years. When the Koch brothers comissioned a study and the study supported climate change and the scientist who did the study changed his mind and said that it was irrefutable than I think it fair to say that if you want to follow a blog you can find one that says the moon is made of cheddar. But its hardly science.
There are still idiots who say that smoking and second hand smoke are not bad for people. I hear idiots say that my granddad, father ect smoked till he/she was 98 and never got sick as some kind of evidence that smoking is not bad.
It was only about 30 years ago that Fred Flintstone was used to show how good smoking was, it was not that long ago that magazines had adds that said that smoking was healthful and make you feel better. Many of the studys that showed that smoking was not harmful were commissioned by tobacco companys that created fake scientific fronts to "study" the affects of smoking. I don't think people with a brain will buy the idea that dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere is not going to have any affect on our weather.
It has been proven that when the earth was much hotter then now and the whole earth was basically a green house thousands of years ago the CO2 was very high. No not all CO2 is man made but what we are doing is making a situation worse.
Its as stupid as saying we can't fish out the sea, or dumping crap in the ocean will not have any affect. 7 billion people pumping crap in the air is gong to have an affect.
How people can be so utterly and completely stupid is just way beyond me. The statement tht the world "is not warming" is as intellegent as saying, It doesn't get light when the sun comes up". Just freakin mindless drivel. I guess the reason all the ice is disappearing and much of the permafrost is melting in the Canadian arctic is because it's so darn COLD. We need a law that would force people like this to wear a ten foot high DUNCE HAT to loudly proclaim they are complete and incurable goofballs.
One can only wonder at the right wing's descent into mysticism, magical thinking and pseudoscience. But this is the natural result of actively driving the rational moderates out of the tribe. If we were still prehistoric men, they would mostly be cave bear scat by now.
One can only wonder at the right wing's descent into mysticism, magical thinking and pseudoscience. But this is the natural result of actively driving the rational moderates out of the tribe. If we were still prehistoric men, they would mostly be cave bear scat by now.
The above seems to perfectly describe the left especially their prediction of the coming ice age back in the 70's that I fell for hook, line and sinker!
When I look at the funny chart the thing that should pop out to all is the general direction of prediction and acutal climate movement.
A downward turn is not a and indication that the predicions were incorrect. If in 10 years, the line trends upward again... and the overall trend is upward, is the science then correct and irrefutable?
They were nowhere near their estimates.
It would be like me saying that I am predicting a roll between 5-10 and the results are a 3 or 4. It isn't just a miss, it is a sign that the models are seriously flawed.
The insignificance in trend is around 16 years, now keep in mind they used less than that to establish a claim of warming. So how many years of stagnant temps and downturn are needed to establish a trend? Are you saying that in order to invalidate the previous position of warming, that the observable data needs to be 2 to 3 times longer than the original trend evaluation?
If the downturn continues for another 10 years, it means we will have nearly a 30 year trend of no warming or slight downturn, 30 years! Do you not see the problem here?
I am not saying we won't continue to warm, but the argument you are making is one based on "well, it will warm, just wait... lets believe those who claim it will, because it could, and they say it is likely!"
They have no grounds to establish such a claim. Scientifically, their positions have failed. Clinging to a failed hypothesis is not science, it is dogma and it gets in the way of actually understanding how the systems work.
Take a look again. This is an animated image to show you how bad the predictions are.
If that graph was a prediction assessment of the financial results of an investment firm, would you throw money at it?
What is a belief? The fact that we have not had any significant warming in the past 16 years or the part where the predictions made by all groups concerning the warming trend have been shown to be completely invalid? Are you saying those are not facts?
We have 10 of the hottest years in the past 15 years. When the Koch brothers comissioned a study and the study supported climate change and the scientist who did the study changed his mind and said that it was irrefutable than I think it fair to say that if you want to follow a blog you can find one that says the moon is made of cheddar. But its hardly science.
If you check out the graph provided, it doesn't take a climatologist to see the upward movement of the black line. The recent downward movment is not the whole of the line's progression.
I am commenting on the graph/information provided. Lets stick to the information provided...If you would like to introduce further information, I will assess your contention.
I can not make assessment to information in your head.
Share and compare.
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.
