That is another debate, I and many others would argue as to the extent of the warming caused by CO2 climate forcing. That's not the point though, the salient point is that the pause is real despite many attempts to remove it by massaging the land based and sea based data. Satellites and radiosondes measure the troposphere and they are in full agreement. If you dispute that then I have no more to say to you.He said "dominant" not just "signal present"
It's little misrepresentations like this that out you as a hack, by the way.
By the way, do you have a point?
You spew out the same crap everytime, deal with the now ffs. In the 70s, scientists were adamant that the world was heading towards global cooling, true scientists adapt as the data changes. I believe you studied geology, surely I don't have to tell you about how the scientific community treated the theory of plate tectonics initially do I?This is some serious backtracking, goal post moving, and retreating here.
Anyone who has paid a nominal, minimal amount of attention to this subject over the last three decades knows the denier community did not always accept there was global warming and that man was contributing to it.
The fought tooth and nail for the most part of the last 30 years denying any warming was even happening, or that a vast international cabal of climate scientists were perpetrating a hoax.
There was never any goal post moving until recently - namely, that the denier community supposedly always knew global warming was real to some extent, and that there was a human contribution to it.
When the Climate Gate faux non-scandal was in full swing on this board, and deniers claimed it was proof that global warming had been faked, did you post a any threads telling the deniers they were going too far? That you rejected their assertions of global conspiracies?
Holy shit, so now you are emulating Desh and using Wiki as a source!! Are you really that desperate, I'll bet you haven't a clue who David Aaronovitch or Nigel are, be honest."David Aaronovitch noted the GWPF's launch in The Times, writing "Lord Lawson’s acceptance of the science turns out, on close scrutiny, to be considerably less than half-hearted. Thus he speaks of 'the (present) majority scientific view', hinting rather slyly at the near possibility of a future, entirely different scientific view. (...) 'Sceptic' (...) is simply a misnomer. People such as Lord Lawson are not sceptical, for if one major peer-reviewed piece of scientific research were ever to be published casting doubt on climate change theory, you just know they’d have it up in neon at Piccadilly Circus. They are only sceptical about what they don’t want to be true"
Wiki
Holy shit, so now you are emulating Desh and using Wiki as a source!! Are you really that desperate, I'll bet you haven't a clue who David Aaronovitch or Nigel are, be honest.
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
That is another debate, I and many others would argue as to the extent of the warming caused by CO2 climate forcing. That's not the point though, the salient point is that the pause is real despite many attempts to remove it by massaging the land based and sea based data. Satellites and radiosondes measure the troposphere and they are in full agreement. If you dispute that then I have no more to say to you.
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
nobody is saying that there isn't an anthropogenic signal present!
He is mostly right, there was a warming period in the Arctic between 1920 and 1940 every bit as pronounced as that between 1970 and 1998.
http://mclean.ch/climate/Arctic_1920_40.htm
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1873965211000053
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Holy shit, so now you are emulating Desh and using Wiki as a source!! Are you really that desperate, I'll bet you haven't a clue who David Aaronovitch or Nigel are, be honest.
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
No that's bullshit. The Earth has even been around that long.5 billion years, huh?
Well on matters of science it is a reliable source. However when it comes to questions of, he said she said, then it is in the realms of the political and subjective.Dishonest douchenozzle. Not long ago you cited Wiki as one of your sources when responding to me
Ok, I will allow one Tourettes from you but that's your last. Anymore and you are banned.Dishonest douchenozzle. Not long ago you cited Wiki as one of your sources when responding to me
Donald Trump Calls Global Climate Change a “Chinese Hoax”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nald-trump-did-call-climate-change-chinese-h/
Murray Energy CEO (American Coal Baron) claims global warming is a hoax
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/17/murray-energy-ceo-claims-global-warming-is-a-hoax.html
Republican Senator Inhofe has been the foremost Republican promoting arguments for climate change denial in the global warming controversy. He famously said in the Senate that global warming is a hoax. Sen. Inhofe believes that global warming is a hoax.
https://www.epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=230594
Dishonest douchenozzle. Not long ago you cited Wiki as one of your sources when responding to me
Well that's pretty much what I think of you, so we finally agree on something at least.This explanation doesn't erase your misrepresentation. Sorry. You are a hack.
..., If you dispute that then I have no more to say to you.
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Plus I used a direct quote of a person within the wiki article on Milagros think tank source. The deprecation of wiki is only relevant in event there is a bona fide question as to the accuracy of the quoted material.
Is that's promise? Last I checked you were breaking ground on multiple threads dedicated to my nom du plum.
Well that's pretty much what I think of you, so we finally agree on something at least.
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Yes so that why you quoted a left wing hack like Aaronovitch ffs!Well you can claim that ground, but you will lack equal footing to make it. Orthodoxy beats heterodoxy as between non experts when assessing science. I'm simply agreeing with all the experts. If they agreed with you, so would I. Then you'd be calling me an asset to this august website, scholar and gentleman.
David Aaronovitch is a writer ffs, what does he know about anything? You obviously don't know him otherwise you wouldn't quote somebody so flaky.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/02/watch-david-aaronovitch-makes-utter-fool-newsnight/
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk