Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#4,352
#4,352
Mtntrout said:
Should just read "I don't understand the science, so I don't think it is true."
Click to expand...

How old is the earth compared to how long we've collected data? Like I just previously said, we are around 4 degrees cooler right now than the average temperature through the medieval warm period.


Edit: and anybody who says they understand how the climate changes and can predict what it's going to do is a bafoon
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4,353
#4,353
BartW said:
Math. Good. Now factor in how powerful each GHG is and…
Click to expand...

You'd think their models would work better if they understood that.

I know what you’re thinking of and understand the confusion. The simple answer is that water vapor is a feedback -- not a forcing. As trout pointed out, the IPCC doesn’t ignore the effects of water vapor (or any other significant factors).
Click to expand...

Well, it doesn't really matter if it is a forcing or a feedback. It is still the predominant greenhouse gas.

Explaining how the water vapor greenhouse effect works

My point is that we can directly measure the impact of each GHG (regardless of concentration). In fact, spectroscopy is widely used in order to measure the composition/concentration of gases.
Click to expand...

That's nice.

So do you deny that “the biggest science scandal evar” is a conspiracy (theory)? Because that sure seems to be the implication…

If it is, are Richard Mueller, Judith Curry, and Anthony Watts in on the conspiracy too?
Click to expand...

Do you deny that some conspiracy theories actually could really be conspiracies?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,355
#4,355
OrangeWayOfLife said:
How old is the earth compared to how long we've collected data? Like I just previously said, we are around 4 degrees cooler right now than the average temperature through the medieval warm period.


Edit: and anybody who says they understand how the climate changes and can predict what it's going to do is a bafoon
Click to expand...

They can't accurately predict the weather tomorrow and expect me to believe they have global warming figured out and it's all because of man.

Smh
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,356
#4,356
MaxamusXIII said:
They can't accurately predict the weather tomorrow and expect me to believe they have global warming figured out and it's all because of man.

Smh
Click to expand...

According to our resident bunny hugger, predicting the weather tomorrow is hard, but predicting it over millions of years is easy.
 
#4,365
#4,365
#4,370
#4,370
It's Too Cold to Protest Global Warming at Yale

Yale anti-fossil fuel campaigners have indefinitely postponed a protest that was set for this weekend due to “unfavorable weather conditions and other logistical issues.”

Fossil Free Yale, a group pushing the university to divest itself from fossil fuels, told the Yale Daily News that frigid, snowy weather set for this weekend will mean their global warming protest will have to be postponed.
Click to expand...

Maybe they should have noticed that the scientific community is in agreement that it's cold in New Haven, CT during the winter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,373
#4,373
Sandvol said:
You'd think their models would work better if they understood that.
Click to expand...
They do.
Sandvol said:
Well, it doesn't really matter if it is a forcing or a feedback. It is still the predominant greenhouse gas.
Click to expand...
Yes, the scientific community is well aware. You were the only one out of the loop. If the IPCC’s forcing bar chart displeases you, just use this:

skeptic_forcing1.png

Sandvol said:
That's nice.
Click to expand...
You asked :hi:
Sandvol said:
Do you deny that some conspiracy theories actually could really be conspiracies?
Click to expand...
I'm surprised it's taken you this long to ask. No, there are certainly examples of real conspiracies. A good critical thinker can distinguish between the ridiculous and the plausible. Consider, for example,

1. How large is the supposed conspiracy?
2. How many people are part of this conspiracy?
3. Are there enough of them to carry out the plan?
4. What infrastructure and resources does it need?
5. How much time and money did it take and where did this money come from?
6. If there are many thousands of conspirators, how are they organized?
7. Where are the secret conferences held?
8. How do they keep track of membership?
9. If they are organised through known channels or entities, how do they keep non-members who work there from uncovering the conspiracy?
10. Who gains what from the conspiracy and for what price?
11. Is this the easiest way of gaining it? If not, why was it chosen over the easiest way?
12. If it is an old conspiracy — who gains what from maintaining it?
13. How likely is it to remain covered up if it has gone on for a long time?
14. If there are thousands of conspirators, and the conspiracy has gone on for decades, why have none of them defected?
15. Why have none of them leaked the story?
16. If many conspirators are dead, why have none of them told the truth on their deathbeds, or in their wills?
17. There are many intelligence agencies associated with rival nations, with the ability to expose secrets. If, say, the United States government is running a global conspiracy, why have the French, Russian, or Chinese intelligence agencies never revealed it, to cause a major scandal in the United States (if all intelligence agencies are involved, see #2)? If they have, when and where did they do so?

So, do you still think the temperature adjustment conspiracy theory holds up?

Fox News host: Climate scientists 'fabricated' temperature data
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4,374
#4,374
#4,375
#4,375
Oil sector must take lead in climate debate - Shell CEO

The oil industry needs to take a leading role in the fight against climate change to introduce "realism and practicality" into the debate, the head of Royal Dutch Shell said on Thursday.

"What can we as an industry do to help clear the way for a more informed debate? In the past we thought it was better to keep a low profile on the issue. I understand that tactic, but in the end it's not a good tactic,"

"You cannot talk credibly about lowering emissions globally if, for example, you are slow to acknowledge climate change; if you undermine calls for an effective carbon price; and if you always descend into the 'jobs versus environment' argument in the public debate," van Beurden said.

"I'm well aware that the industry's credibility is an issue. Stereotypes that fail to see the benefits our industry brings to the world are short-sighted. But we must also take a critical look at ourselves."

"Our industry should be less aloof, more assertive. We have to make sure that our voice is heard," the Shell boss said.
Click to expand...
Shell Oil CEO Believes In Global Warming Because He Is A Dirty Hippie Obviously
What kind of commie weirdo is this oil company CEO? It’s almost as if he recognizes that instead of holding onto hydrocarbons forever, Shell could make money doing cleaner energy? Also, we must note that van Beurden is a Dutch citizen, so maybe that explains his crush on climate change. He’s a bicycle-path advocatin’ Agenda 21 dupe from that hotbed of radicalism where marywanna is legal and they serve Royales with cheese. Freak.
Click to expand...
:rock:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top