Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-13-2014, 07:21 AM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,501 posts, read 37,013,406 times
Reputation: 13972

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by voiceofreazon View Post
There is "next to none" in your view because you are so attached to your ideology and your cult that when presented with some, you immediately look for excuses to discount it.
You asked for science from the skeptical side, here you go. I predict that you and the other usual suspects will immediately start Googling and attempting to dig up whatever dirt you can find on the authors, while
you hypocritically refuse to the same for the warmist scientists. So, while I don't expect the cultists to open your minds to other possibilities and points of view, perhaps the people on this forum who can think for
themselves will appreciate the studies….





Climate stability: an inconvenient proof
David Bellamy, Jack Barrett
"This paper demonstrates that the widely prophesied doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels from natural, pre-industrial values will enhance the so-called ‘greenhouse effect’ but will amount to less than 1°C of global warming"
ICE Virtual Library: Climate stability: an inconvenient proof



Modeling climatic effects of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions: unknowns and uncertainties

Willie Soon1,2,*, Sallie Baliunas1,2, Sherwood B. Idso3, Kirill Ya. Kondratyev4, Eric S. Posmentier5
1Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA 2Mount Wilson Observatory, Mount Wilson, California 91023, USA 3US Water Conservation Laboratory, Phoenix, Arizona 85040, USA 4Research Centre for Ecological Safety, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg 197110, Russia 5Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York 11201, USA

"A likelihood of disastrous global environmental consequences has been surmised as a result of projected increases in anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. These estimates are based on computer climate modeling, a branch of science still in its infancy despite recent substantial strides in knowledge.

We further conclude that the incautious use of GCMs to make future climate projections from incomplete or unknown forcing scenarios is antithetical to the intrinsically heuristic value of models. Such uncritical application of climate models has led to the commonly held but erroneous impression that modeling has proven or substantiated the hypothesis that CO2 added to the air has caused or will cause significant global warming."

Inter Research*»*CR*»*v18*»*n3*»*p259-275



Global warming and long-term climatic changes: a progress report
L. F. Khilyuk Æ G. V. Chilingar

Abstract The authors believe that recent global warming of Earth’s atmosphere is not due to an increase in anthropogenic carbon dioxide emission but rather to long-term global factors. The human contribution to the CO2 content in the atmosphere and the increase in temperature is negligible in comparison with other sources of carbon dioxide emission. Discussed in this paper are sources, avenues of migration, and the amounts of naturally produced carbon dioxide and methane (greenhouse gases) and long-term changes in the Earth’s climate, which are necessary for understanding the causes of current temperature trends.

http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimber...ressReport.pdf

Reasoning about climate uncertainty
Judith Curry

This paper argues that the IPCC has oversimplified the issue of uncertainty in its Assessment Reports, which can lead to misleading overconfidence. A concerted effort by the IPCC is needed to identify better ways of framing the climate change problem, explore and characterize uncertainty, reason about uncertainty in the context of evidence-based logical hierarchies, and eliminate bias from the consensus building process itself.

Reasoning about climate uncertainty - Springer



Nature of observed temperature changes across the United States during the 20th century
Paul C. Knappenberger1,*, Patrick J. Michaels2, Robert E. Davis2
1New Hope Environmental Services, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903, USA
2Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903, USA

In contrast, the warming during the most recent period, often used as evidence of human- induced climate change, is characterized by temperature moderation—the pattern of temperature rise exhibits a strong, preferential warming of the coldest days of the year.
I guess you agree then, as what you have presented is next to nothing compared to the almost ten thousand papers published in favor of AGW, plus some of what you have cited are badly out of date.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-13-2014, 07:56 AM
 
1,824 posts, read 1,365,438 times
Reputation: 1569
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
I guess you agree then, as what you have presented is next to nothing compared to the almost ten thousand papers published in favor of AGW, plus some of what you have cited are badly out of date.
Yes, you caught me. That is the ENTIRETY of all skeptical science on AGW
Sorry, I have to work for a living, I don't have all day to spend on the internet linking to science articles.
You said that no one has provided any science from the skeptical side. I did a rather quick search and immediately was able to produce some. Now you are complaining because there are not more and they are out of date. Let me ask you. How many of the so called ten thousand in support of AGW do you suppose are "badly out of date"" Does that criteria work both ways?
Does the fact that it's MUCH easier to get funding, support and peer approval for research that conforms to the AGW alarmism factor into the "almost ten thousand papers" ? Yeah, didn't think so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2014, 08:01 AM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,141,284 times
Reputation: 12100
Quote:
Originally Posted by voiceofreazon View Post
Yes, you caught me. That is the ENTIRETY of all skeptical science on AGW
Sorry, I have to work for a living, I don't have all day to spend on the internet linking to science articles.
You said that no one has provided any science from the skeptical side. I did a rather quick search and immediately was able to produce some. Now you are complaining because there are not more and they are out of date. Let me ask you. How many of the so called ten thousand in support of AGW do you suppose are "badly out of date"" Does that criteria work both ways?
Does the fact that it's MUCH easier to get funding, support and peer approval for research that conforms to the AGW alarmism factor into the "almost ten thousand papers" ? Yeah, didn't think so.
What the warmers have to understand but won't since their very well-being hinges on their apocalyptic message is that the earth heats and cools periodically.

However on the flip side, those of us that disagree with their stance actually keep them employed trying, I believe, in vain to prove their theories.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2014, 08:13 AM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,683,351 times
Reputation: 20028
Quote:
Originally Posted by voiceofreazon View Post
Yes, you caught me. That is the ENTIRETY of all skeptical science on AGW
Sorry, I have to work for a living, I don't have all day to spend on the internet linking to science articles.
You said that no one has provided any science from the skeptical side. I did a rather quick search and immediately was able to produce some. Now you are complaining because there are not more and they are out of date. Let me ask you. How many of the so called ten thousand in support of AGW do you suppose are "badly out of date"" Does that criteria work both ways?
Does the fact that it's MUCH easier to get funding, support and peer approval for research that conforms to the AGW alarmism factor into the "almost ten thousand papers" ? Yeah, didn't think so.
no it doesnt work both ways in their minds. remember that anything that skeptics post is not peer reviewed, or science but rather a blog or an article in a magazine that means nothing, or the writer is somehow paid by the oil companies, or what ever other excuse they can make up not to read the article, or they read the article and they find an excuse to reject it in some manner.

but everything they post is carved in the very living rock by what ever creator they believe in(or dont) and is settled science because al gore said so 20 years ago after he won his nobel prize in science, with the IPCC, and then when gore name is invoked, they say gore is no scientist, unless someone claims gore was speaking the truth, then suddenly gore becomes a scientist to support the argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2014, 09:37 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,610 posts, read 26,256,746 times
Reputation: 12633
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
You should read the entire article, then you will realize that it does not support your denialist views...The atmosphere's temperature has increased only 0.21 degrees since the denier's cherry picked year of 1998 (A year when the temperature was influenced by a strong El Nino), but the oceans temperature has continued to rise.


More ****in' excuses?

"Though scientists don't have any firm answers, they do have multiple theories."


I have a theory too.

They don't know what the **** they're talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2014, 09:49 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,501 posts, read 37,013,406 times
Reputation: 13972
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
More ****in' excuses?

"Though scientists don't have any firm answers, they do have multiple theories."


I have a theory too.

They don't know what the **** they're talking about
.
And you do? Now that is hilarious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2014, 10:44 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,683,351 times
Reputation: 20028
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
And you do? Now that is hilarious.
well we do know that YOU dont know what you are talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2014, 10:58 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,501 posts, read 37,013,406 times
Reputation: 13972
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
well we do know that YOU dont know what you are talking about.
Now that is a personal attack, and not only that it is a lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-13-2014, 10:59 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,683,351 times
Reputation: 20028
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Now that is a personal attack, and not only that it is a lie.
like you havent made personal attacks before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2014, 12:16 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,610 posts, read 26,256,746 times
Reputation: 12633
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
And you do? Now that is hilarious.

Not my predictions that failed to materialize.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top