Scientist who said climate change sceptics were proved wrong accused of hiding truth
- Thread starter cancel2 2022
- Start date
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
That does appear to be the pattern of Moot The Simple.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
The trouble is so much money has been diverted into technologies like wind turbines which are hideously expensive and still need conventional power to provide a reliable baseload. In the UK, they are building the London Array, the biggest wind farm in the world, I fear that will become the biggest white elephant as well.
Wind turbines have a working life of around fifteen years if they don't catch fire first as many have done. the final cost will be around £2.2 billion and will generate a maximum of a gigawatt when they are all running optimally although as they only work for a third of the time they have to be massively subsidised or nobody would build them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Array
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Seriously, you should immediately cease with the continued failed attempts to think.
Warming occurred, AS STATED, and AS THE DATA SHOWS.... from mid-century until the late 1990's. It has REMAINED warm since then, but there has been NO SIGNIFICANT WARMING SINCE THE LATE 1990's.... AS THE DATA SHOWS.
Do let us know if you are able to comprehend it this time.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I know. We just wasted $500 million on a solar project that was doomed to failure prior to the loan going through. The religious fanatics of global warming are determined to continue pushing failed ideas for the sake of 'saving the planet'. That is why idiots like Mott get all worked up and start throwing temper tantrums or creating straw men in a vain attempt to deflect away from the fact that there religious beliefs are being criticized and partially debunked. They are going to keep fighting to keep their gravy train flowing. No matter what.... just shout consensus stomp your feet and call anyone who dares disagree a science denier. That is all you are going to get from them at this point.
Look at both of the fear mongers on this thread... both tried to divert the topic to links of other articles. One was so distraught about his religion being questioned that he failed to see that the site he linked up to was about the very same author your OP was talking about.
Bfgrn
New member
I didn't SAY Judith Curry is just a stooge for Exxon et al. HERE is what I did say. She sounds like someone to be skeptical of. Especially when she is so popular with the Teapublicans who don't believe pollution needs to be controlled.
How can you be so intelligent on many issues, and stand with such scum on environmental issue TOM???
Judith A. Curry is chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. A high profile climate communicator, she runs a climate blog and is regularly invited by Republicans to testify at climate hearings about uncertainties in climate understanding and predictions.
Her climate outreach communication has been criticized for containing elementary mistakes and inflammatory assertions unsupported by evidence.
Criticisms from climate scientists
Liu and Curry's August 2010 paper, "Accelerated warming of the Southern Ocean and its impacts on the hydrological cycle and sea ice", has been criticized for its failure to cite previous papers drawing the same conclusion, and for its "uncritical use of invalid data".
Curry's "public outreach" communication is criticized by prominent climate scientists and other science-aligned climate bloggers for its propensity toward "inflammatory language and over-the-top accusations ...with the...absence of any concrete evidence and [with] errors in matters of simple fact."
Gavin Schmidt has criticized Curry for "not knowing enough about what she has chosen to talk about, for not thinking clearly about the claims she has made with respect to the IPCC, and for flinging serious accusations at other scientists without just cause."
James Annan has laid out examples of Curry's "history of throwing up vague or demonstrably wrong claims, then running away when shown to be wrong."
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Two years ago the then Democrat-controlled NC legislature mandated that we get 10% of our electricity from renewables. Duke Energy stepped up and financed two huge solar "farms" (destroying actual farms in the process). Now they are asking for an 18% rate increase.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
See Tom..... no thought on his part, no rebutting anything in the OP article. He refuses to discuss anything.
Captain cut and paste strikes again!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Imagine that... Mott hasn't returned. Captain cut and paste can't find any articles either.... breaks one's heart to see the religious fanatics forced to come to grips with the reality that their masters lied to them.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
As I said earlier, I'm not surprised. Moot's too much of a coward to admit that he's wrong.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
I want to know why there was a fear, in the early 1960's, that we were headed for another Ice Age.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Because we had stupid liberals then, too.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Somehow I knew poor ignorant religiously indoctrinated fear mongering Mott would not return to address his humiliating performance on this thread.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Gosh you're funny. I abandoned this post after I finished laughing about your reference to the CERN experiment. Didn't read it did you? LOL
I'm starting to draw the conclusion that maybe you aren't intellectually dishonest on this topic and that, yes, you really are this illiterate in science.
So, in that vein, what conclusion did you draw from the CERN expermiment? And try not to make us laugh when you answer that question please.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Gosh you're funny. I abandoned this post after I finished laughing about your reference to the CERN experiment. Didn't read it did you? LOL
I'm starting to draw the conclusion that maybe you aren't intellectually dishonest on this topic and that, yes, you really are this illiterate in science.
So, in that vein, what conclusion did you draw from the CERN expermiment? And try not to make us laugh when you answer that question please.
1) ah, so you were 'laughing' again. Kind of like you were 'laughing' as you kept asking everyone to read about Muller in the article you kept linking to, all the while completely ignorant of the FACT that the OP article that you refuse to read was about the very same author? That kind of 'laughing'? The kind of 'oh my God I am embarrassed for having been such a fool and for everyone to be mocking me now' kind of laugh? That kind of 'laughing'?
2) Again, it is YOU that has been intellectually dishonest on this thread.... consistently so. It is quite amusing for you to continue proclaiming I am 'intellectually dishonest', yet when asked, you cannot provide even ONE example of my doing so on this thread? Not one Mott? I can point to yours if you like?
3) I did not personally draw a conclusion from the CERN experiment as I did not conduct any studies myself. I did however read what has been written on the experiment. From the reports on the experiment it shows that cosmic radiation could be playing a larger role in the late century warming trend than your global warming fear mongers told you. Which yet again shows that you idiots are wrong to declare a 'consensus' when so much is yet to be known on the topic. There is much more to be debated. The very fact that idiots like you still continue to cling to your chants of 'consensus' shows us which group truly 'denies' science.
You can actually read up on what has been said at the following links: (note, these articles provoked Gore into proclaiming 'deniers' are 'racists' etc... and other nonsense like that)
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/206...xperiment-sun-cosmic-rays-chambor-cloud-c.htm
http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2011/08/25/did-cloud-just-rain-on-the-global-warming-parade/
Due note as well Mott.... as usual, I answered your questions. Yet you provide one lame excuse after another to avoid answering mine. Why is that Mott?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
So tell us Mott.... these are all simple questions, even a pretend scientist like you should be able to answer them.....
1) Do you deny the outcome of the CERN data?
2) Do you deny the Earth has not significantly warmed since the late 1990's?
3) Do you deny the fact that despite the lack of warming CO2 levels have risen?
4) Do you deny the fact that the computer models used by the fear mongers have been obliterated by actual data?
1) Do you deny the outcome of the CERN data?
2) Do you deny the Earth has not significantly warmed since the late 1990's?
3) Do you deny the fact that despite the lack of warming CO2 levels have risen?
4) Do you deny the fact that the computer models used by the fear mongers have been obliterated by actual data?