Scientists Find "Man-made Climate Change Doesn't Exist In Practice"

dukkha said:
one of these days you might actually comment as well
Click to expand...

It will never happen, he's too gaga now!! He's never heard of Henrik Svensmark, Jasper Kirkby, CERN, the CLOUD experiment, Forbush decreases, cloud condensation nuclei (CCN), aerosols or solar irradiance variations.
 
Last edited:
Havana Moon said:
This should piss off Moonatic, here is his favourite news organ on the subject. We all know that he thinks the RT never lies so what will the poor sod do?

Finnish study finds ‘practically no’ evidence for man-made climate change

https://www.rt.com/news/464051-finnish-study-no-evidence-warming/
Click to expand...

RT is simply reporting , maggot. It's what it does. It doesn't AGREE with the crap you swallow, neither does it pose as a Denier Choirmaster like you do.


How's your mod-whispering panning out, old chap ? Haw, haw..........................haw.
 
Havana Moon said:
Well as I said they are all arseholes who think they are so enlightened but in fact just parrot the same old bollox over and over. I have lost count of the number of times from the discredited 97% study, Arsecheese being just the latest.
Click to expand...

Of course, NASA who is deeply involved in Climate sees it as fact. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ Deniers are so simple. Deny the science, deny the facts, deny the scientists are real, deny the scientists are qualified. There are always outiers. There are 3 economists who thing tariffs are a good idea. They are all on Trumps brain trust. But the bulk of data and economists dispute them. The vast, vast majority of people in the climate field have no doubt about man's contribution to global warming. The evidence and data prove it.
 
Gonzomin said:
Of course, NASA who is deeply involved in Climate sees it as fact. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ Deniers are so simple. Deny the science, deny the facts, deny the scientists are real, deny the scientists are qualified. There are always outiers. There are 3 economists who thing tariffs are a good idea. They are all on Trumps brain trust. But the bulk of data and economists dispute them. The vast, vast majority of people in the climate field have no doubt about man's contribution to global warming. The evidence and data prove it.
Click to expand...

Did El Gordo tell you that? As you're so clued up and au fait with the science, can you tell me which of the four Representative Concentration Pathways outlined in the IPCC AR5 report of 2013 you consider to be the most likely? Should be very easy for a man with your obvious insight into climate science.
 
Gonzomin said:
Of course, NASA who is deeply involved in Climate sees it as fact. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ Deniers are so simple. Deny the science, deny the facts, deny the scientists are real, deny the scientists are qualified. There are always outiers. There are 3 economists who thing tariffs are a good idea. They are all on Trumps brain trust. But the bulk of data and economists dispute them. The vast, vast majority of people in the climate field have no doubt about man's contribution to global warming. The evidence and data prove it.
Click to expand...

Maybe you might want to tell me why 49 ex-NASA personnel sent a letter to Charles Bolden in 2012 castigating the way that NASA was politicising and distorting the facts? I'll bet that this is the first you've ever heard of it!!

https://www.cfact.org/2012/04/10/as...-letter-to-nasa-stop-global-warming-advocacy/
 
moon said:
RT is simply reporting , maggot. It's what it does. It doesn't AGREE with the crap you swallow, neither does it pose as a Denier Choirmaster like you do.


How's your mod-whispering panning out, old chap ? Haw, haw..........................haw.
Click to expand...

Did Margarita tell you to say that?
 
Last edited:
Who's Margarita ?

The concept will appear strange to you, maggot- but I think for myself.
 
Havana Moon said:
It will never happen, he's too gaga now!! He's never heard of Henrik Svensmark, Jasper Kirkby, CERN, the CLOUD experiment, Forbush decreases, cloud condensation nuclei (CCN), aerosols or solar irradiance variations.
Click to expand...

True, but I have heard of the following Science organizations, to name just a few, who along with NASA and Trump's own Defense Department, endorse the concept of man made climate change:

American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO
British Antarctic Survey
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Environmental Protection Agency
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
Federation of American Scientists
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of London
International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA)
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Royal Meteorological Society
Royal Society of the UK

As I noted, a false paradigm, common denominator to all flat earthers' efforts, well, that and fear of losing the F350 dually
 
archives said:
True, but I have heard of the following Science organizations, to name just a few, who along with NASA and Trump's own Defense Department, endorse the concept of man made climate change:

American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO
British Antarctic Survey
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Environmental Protection Agency
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
Federation of American Scientists
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of London
International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA)
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Royal Meteorological Society
Royal Society of the UK

As I noted, a false paradigm, common denominator to all flat earthers' efforts, well, that and fear of losing the F350 dually
Click to expand...

No one believes them. If they truly thought climate change was occurring and it was man made, why haven't they all voluntarily stopped breathing and emitting the CO2 they claim is causing it when they exhale? Just more on the left that claim to support a cause but refuse to personally do anything about it.
 
archives said:
Now in addition to the usual dozen or so "studies" we have a dozen or so "reviews" of the preponderance of climate studies, as I noted, it is always about creating a false paradigm, here " fogcatcher" introduces a newspaper article supposedly negating Cook's work, love the part about twelve thousand studies isn't a representative number

By the way, Cook wasn't the only review done, there were a dozen others pretty much confirming his findings, and when the likes of NASA or the US Defense Dept concurs, common sense prevails
Click to expand...

Math error. Failure to provide raw data. Failure to select by randN. Failure to normalize to paired randR. Failure to calculate margin of error. Failure to declare and justify variance sources. Failure to use unbaised raw data.

Redefinition fallacies (scientists<->science, government agency<->science, common sense<->science, common sense<->government agency).

Science isn't scientists. It isn't a government agency. It isn't a 'study' or a 'research'. It doesn't use consensus. There is not voting on theories of science. Science isn't even people at all. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
 
archives said:
Not if you are promoting concepts comparable to the geocentric theory, why would one bother
Click to expand...


One of these days you might prove you actually believe in the cause and voluntarily stop breathing so you no longer emit CO2. Typical left wing coward that claims something but refuses to do his part.
 
archives said:
That's like saying cause no one commented on the content of two pages on the geocentric theory that the geocentric theory is valid
Click to expand...

The Terracentric Theory (what some people call the Geocentric Theory) has been falsified by Galileo. It did not require a vote of any sort.
The Solarcentric Theory (the theory that Earth orbits a stationary Sun) has been falsified by Newton and Einstein. The Sun is not stationary, and is not even the center of Earth's (or any other planet's) orbit around it. It did not require a vote of any sort.

Einstein showed that there is no such thing as an absolute 'zero speed'. All speeds (including zero) are comparisons against a reference point of your own choosing, and the reference point is also moving. What you call 'zero' is strictly up to you and can be chosen arbitrarily!
 
Last edited:
archives said:
Truth be told, the whole Flat Earther movement is financed by those who stand the most to lose if the problem is addressed by creating a "opposing Science" to muddle the waters for those afraid that it is all going to cost them their F350 dually
Click to expand...

WTF?? Why are you discussing the Flat Earth society in a 'global warming' thread???
 
Gonzomin said:
Of course, NASA who is deeply involved in Climate sees it as fact. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Click to expand...
Yes they do. Unfortunately, 'climate change' remains undefined. Consensus is not used in science. Science isn't a government agency. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Nothing more, nothing less.
Gonzomin said:
Deniers are so simple. Deny the science, deny the facts, deny the scientists are real,
Click to expand...
Yeah, Gonzomin. Why do you deny the science, deny the facts, and deny the scientists?

* You can't create energy out of nothing. (1st law of thermodynamics)
* You can't reduce entropy in any system. (2nd law of thermodynamics)
* You can't make heat flow backwards (from cold to hot). (2nd law of thermodynamics)
* You can't reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time. (Stefan-Boltzmann law)
* You can't separate out nodes of energy and disregard rest by considering that portion the total energy. (Kirchoff's law).

You can't ignore these laws of physics.

Gonzomin said:
deny the scientists are qualified.
Click to expand...
Who determines if they are 'qualified'? YOU?? Some university? Qualified for what?? Science isn't scientists. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
Gonzomin said:
There are always outiers.
Click to expand...
What statistical summary are you referring to here? Void argument fallacy. YALIF.
Gonzomin said:
...deleted off topic portion...
The vast, vast majority of people in the climate field have no doubt about man's contribution to global warming.
Click to expand...
Climate 'scientists' deny both science and mathematics.
Gonzomin said:
The evidence and data prove it.
Click to expand...
No evidence needed. Theories of science stand on their own.
No data needed. Theories of science stand on their own.

The burden of proof is on YOU, dude. YOU are the one claiming all this data exists. YOU are the one claiming that you can falsify the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law with it. Where's all this data? Where's the beef?

What evidence? What data?

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
 
archives said:
True, but I have heard of the following Science organizations, to name just a few, who along with NASA and Trump's own Defense Department, endorse the concept of man made climate change:

American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO
British Antarctic Survey
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Environmental Protection Agency
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
Federation of American Scientists
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of London
International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA)
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Royal Meteorological Society
Royal Society of the UK

As I noted, a false paradigm, common denominator to all flat earthers' efforts, well, that and fear of losing the F350 dually
Click to expand...

Science isn't an academy, society, or any other political organization. Science isn't scientists at all. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Consensus is not used in science. Only religions and politics do that.
 
Into the Night said:
The Terracentric Theory (what some people call the Geocentric Theory) has been falsified by Galileo. It did not require a vote of any sort.
The Solarcentric Theory (the theory that Earth orbits a stationary Sun) has been falsified by Newton and Einstein. The Sun is not stationary, and is not even the center of Earth's (or any other planet's) orbit around it.

Einstein showed that there is no such thing as an absolute 'zero speed'. All speeds (including zero) are comparisons against a reference point of your own choosing, and the reference point is also moving. What you call 'zero' is strictly up to you and can be chosen arbitrarily!
Click to expand...

Beautiful, now "nightie" again wants to show everyone he's got the semantics down, did you actually think the comment was made anticipating a discussion of the geocentric theory?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top