Discussion:
THIS Is Where You Climate Bogans Lose The Public
(too old to reply)
AlleyCat
2017-08-08 21:43:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Loading Image...

Why can't they say that temperature has risen x amount since 1880? Because
there were "cooler" years interspersed within the decades that were NOT a
part of their "periods" of comparison, and that would ruin their
hypotheses.

It's always nice to see GOVERNMENT offices fudge numbers. I get a real
swell of pride when I see what our government has become.

Loading Image...

Now, we're in the future... yippee!

Loading Image...

Please explain these to a 5th grader:

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Here we are... putting money and cost onto a "WEATHER EVENT" to try and
show how "extreme" the WEATHER event was. What if a hurricane has 200mph
sustained winds and the lowest pressure ever recorded, but never comes
ashore and causes NO damage. Did it make a sound?


Loading Image...

LOL... we now have gone to the top of the ridiculousness pile. We've
started anthropomorphizing weather and fire events.

"These high-impact events occur preferentially under hotter, drier
conditions."

Fire PREFERS a hot and dry condition. So... fire can THINK now, huh?

I guess 5th graders DO make up the bulk of the government agencies now.
Rudy Canoza
2017-08-08 22:15:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who does.
What you know about are right-wingnut fake news sites that specialize in
fooling gullible fat fucks like you.

Fuck off.
Wally W.
2017-08-09 11:58:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit.
Because *you* say so?

You just keep repeating the same denunciation after snipping his posts
and offering no refutation of any one thing in his post.

Maybe you and "7," who ends his posts with the nonsense, "Can I have a
bacon sandwich to top it all off?", can trade canned spew.
Bud Frawley
2017-08-09 18:37:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@4ax.com>, ***@aim.com
says...
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit.
Because *you* say so?
no because 97% percent of scientist's say so! I guess you do'nt beleive
in science! my cousin which work's in the biggest college in the country
and you no what he did? he poled the screntist's at his college and you
no what they said? 100% of them said we're in global warming! thank's
for proveing your smarter then 100% of the scientisty's at the biggest
college in the country! guess what moron? your NOT! I hope you no how to
swim because that's what your gonna be doung once global warming kick's
in big time!
Post by Wally W.
You just keep repeating the same denunciation after snipping his posts
and offering no refutation of any one thing in his post.
Maybe you and "7," who ends his posts with the nonsense, "Can I have a
bacon sandwich to top it all off?", can trade canned spew.
SeaSnake
2017-08-09 22:34:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bud Frawley
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit.
Because *you* say so?
no because 97% percent of scientist's say so! I guess you do'nt beleive
Correct, because you are LYING!

97% of scientists do NOT say so.

Now bugger off, 1/2wit.

In fact:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

There is no consensus
The Petition Project features over 31,000 scientists signing the
petition stating "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human
release of carbon dioxide will, in the forseeable future, cause
catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere ...". (Petition Project)

https://inpursuitofhappiness.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/22000-scientists-disagree-with-un-global-warming-push/

Right now the UN claims that they have about 2,500 people involved in
this and about 600 scientists seriously involved. This is what Al Gore
would point to today.

We have more than 22,000 scientist signers of our global-warming
petition who’ve looked at the issue and concluded essentially the
opposite of these United Nations people. This says nothing about the
science. Science does not depend on polling. Just because we have
22,000, and the UN may have 600, does not matter. The only thing our
petition demonstrates is that there is no consensus among scientists in
support of the UN claims.
Wally W.
2017-08-10 02:27:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bud Frawley
says...
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit.
Because *you* say so?
no because 97% percent of scientist's say so!
97% of *all* scientists say "every word [Allleycat] write about global
warming is bullshit"?

AlleyCat is known to 97% of all scientists?

He is quite famous if 97% of all scientists (from all countries) know
who he is.
Post by Bud Frawley
I guess you do'nt beleive
in science! my cousin which work's in the biggest college in the country
and you no what he did? he poled the screntist's at his college and you
no what they said? 100% of them said we're in global warming! thank's
for proveing your smarter then 100% of the scientisty's at the biggest
college in the country! guess what moron? your NOT! I hope you no how to
swim because that's what your gonna be doung once global warming kick's
in big time!
<https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/04/07/asking-the-wrong-question/>
To ferociously insist – as politicians and activists do – that
man-made climate change is real is meaningless. That remark is worthy
of a child. It demonstrates no sophistication whatsoever.
AlleyCat
2017-08-10 02:51:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 09 Aug 2017 22:27:47 -0400, Wally W. says...
Post by Wally W.
<https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2015/04/07/asking-the-wrong-question/>
To ferociously insist ? as politicians and activists do ? that
man-made climate change is real is meaningless. That remark is worthy
of a child. It demonstrates no sophistication whatsoever.
Dyson calls the CO2 increase, "... extremely important. It's enormously
beneficial both to food production and to biodiversity, preservation of
species, and everything else that's good."

You'd think environmentalists would be dancing in the streets. You'd think
they'd be celebrating CO2 as a miracle cure. A bit more of it in the
atmosphere has averted famine and made the natural world stronger and
healthier.

Nope... a greener earth, where there is less desert to burn up in, more
crops for food, and a wetter earth to GROW those crops, doesn't fit their
anti-capitalist agendas, where they hope oil companies go out of business
and the left makes money off of "alternative fuels".

Kinda hypocritical, them being anti-capitalist, but wanting money for
their causes.
Rudy Canoza
2017-08-10 03:06:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who does.
What you know about are right-wingnut fake news sites that specialize in
fooling gullible fat fucks like you.

Fuck off.
Wally W.
2017-08-10 03:37:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who does.
You don't know who he knows. You spew with certainty what you cannot
possibly know.

Such behavior is endemic among alarmist, greenie, weasels.
Post by Rudy Canoza
What you know about are right-wingnut fake news sites that specialize in
fooling gullible fat fucks like you.
Fuck off.
You repeated the same spew with no refutation.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
different results." - Albert Einstein
DoD
2017-08-10 03:47:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who does.
You don't know who he knows. You spew with certainty what you cannot
possibly know.
Such behavior is endemic among alarmist, greenie, weasels.
Post by Rudy Canoza
What you know about are right-wingnut fake news sites that specialize in
fooling gullible fat fucks like you.
Fuck off.
You repeated the same spew with no refutation.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
different results." - Albert Einstein
Rudolf is a hate-filled, half-witted, half-pint homo....
SeaSnake
2017-08-10 14:53:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by DoD
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who does.
You don't know who he knows. You spew with certainty what you cannot
possibly know.
Such behavior is endemic among alarmist, greenie, weasels.
Post by Rudy Canoza
What you know about are right-wingnut fake news sites that specialize in
fooling gullible fat fucks like you.
Fuck off.
You repeated the same spew with no refutation.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
different results." - Albert Einstein
Rudolf is a hate-filled, half-witted, half-pint homo....
Yes he is!

And his real name is Jonathan Ball.
M.I.Wakefield
2017-08-10 03:55:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who does.
You don't know who he knows. You spew with certainty what you cannot
possibly know.
No, Alley Cat has a long record, and he really is as ignorant as fuck.
Wally W.
2017-08-10 04:22:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who does.
You don't know who he knows. You spew with certainty what you cannot
possibly know.
No, Alley Cat has a long record, and he really is as ignorant as fuck.
Not saying it is true, but your statement is irrelevant to whether
Rudy can know who AC knows.
SeaSnake
2017-08-10 14:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Rudy Canoza
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't
know a >fucking thing about the subject, and you don't know anyone who
does.
You don't know who he knows. You spew with certainty what you cannot
possibly know.
No, Alley Cat has a long record, and he really is as ignorant as fuck.
And yet every cleanly cited URL he has posted here is correct, you
simpering, slackwitted, canuckleheaded cunt.


The southern hemisphere has been COOLING!

https://www.sott.net/article/353204-Southern-Hemisphere-cooling-trend-is-now-apparent

David Archibald has today given the most up to date information on our
Sun entering a grand solar minimum and the State of the Sun, now with
the past 5 winters under our belts we can look for trends. I present to
you the trend of a cooling Southern Hemisphere.


Ya know, a planet has TWO hemispheres.
SeaSnake
2017-08-10 14:52:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit. You don't know a
fucking thing about
I KNOW!

The southern hemisphere has been COOLING!


https://www.sott.net/article/353204-Southern-Hemisphere-cooling-trend-is-now-apparent

David Archibald has today given the most up to date information on our
Sun entering a grand solar minimum and the State of the Sun, now with
the past 5 winters under our belts we can look for trends. I present to
you the trend of a cooling Southern Hemisphere.


Ya know, a planet has TWO hemispheres.

HTH, little man Ball.
Catoni
2017-08-11 07:36:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bud Frawley
says...
Post by Wally W.
Post by Rudy Canoza
[...]
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit.
Because *you* say so?
no because 97% percent of scientist's say so!
LOL here they go again with that phony "...97% of scientists..." bullshit....

Putting the 'con' in consensus; Not only is there no 97 per cent consensus among climate scientists, many misunderstand core issues

Appeared in the Financial Post
In the lead-up to the Paris climate summit, massive activist pressure is on all governments, especially Canada’s, to fall in line with the global warming agenda and accept emission targets that could seriously harm our economy. One of the most powerful rhetorical weapons being deployed is the claim that 97 per cent of the world’s scientists agree what the problem is and what we have to do about it. In the face of such near-unanimity, it would be understandable if Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Canadian government were simply to capitulate and throw Canada’s economy under the climate change bandwagon. But it would be a tragedy because the 97 per cent claim is a fabrication.

Like so much else in the climate change debate, one needs to check the numbers. First of all, on what exactly are 97 per cent of experts supposed to agree? In 2013, U.S. President Barack Obama sent out a tweet claiming 97 per cent of climate experts believe global warming is “real, man-made and dangerous.” As it turns out, the survey he was referring to didn’t ask that question, so he was basically making it up. At a recent debate in New Orleans, I heard climate activist Bill McKibben claim there was a consensus that greenhouse gases are “a grave danger.” But when challenged for the source of his claim, he promptly withdrew it.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change asserts the conclusion that most (more than 50 per cent) of the post-1950 global warming is due to human activity, chiefly greenhouse gas emissions and land use change. But it does not survey its own contributors, let alone anyone else, so we do not know how many experts agree with it. And the statement, even if true, does not imply that we face a crisis requiring massive restructuring of the worldwide economy. In fact, it is consistent with the view that the benefits of fossil fuel use greatly outweigh the climate-related costs.

One commonly cited survey asked if carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and human activities contribute to climate change. But these are trivial statements that even many IPCC skeptics agree with. And again, both statements are consistent with the view that climate change is harmless. So there are no policy implications of such surveys, regardless of the level of agreement.

The most highly cited paper supposedly found 97 per cent of published scientific studies support man-made global warming. But in addition to poor survey methodology, that tabulation is often misrepresented. Most papers (66 per cent) actually took no position. Of the remaining 34 per cent, 33 per cent supported at least a weak human contribution to global warming. So divide 33 by 34 and you get 97 per cent, but this is unremarkable since the 33 per cent includes many papers that critique key elements of the IPCC position.

Two recent surveys shed more light on what atmospheric scientists actually think. Bear in mind that on a topic as complex as climate change, a survey is hardly a reliable guide to scientific truth, but if you want to know how many people agree with your view, a survey is the only way to find out.

In 2012 the American Meteorological Society (AMS) surveyed its 7,000 members, receiving 1,862 responses. Of those, only 52% said they think global warming over the 20th century has happened and is mostly man-made (the IPCC position). The remaining 48% either think it happened but natural causes explain at least half of it, or it didn’t happen, or they don’t know. Furthermore, 53% agree that there is conflict among AMS members on the question.

So no sign of a 97% consensus. Not only do about half reject the IPCC conclusion, more than half acknowledge that their profession is split on the issue.

The Netherlands Environmental Agency recently published a survey of international climate experts. 6550 questionnaires were sent out, and 1868 responses were received, a similar sample and response rate to the AMS survey. In this case the questions referred only to the post-1950 period. 66% agreed with the IPCC that global warming has happened and humans are mostly responsible. The rest either don’t know or think human influence was not dominant. So again, no 97% consensus behind the IPCC.

But the Dutch survey is even more interesting because of the questions it raises about the level of knowledge of the respondents. Although all were described as “climate experts,” a large fraction only work in connected fields such as policy analysis, health and engineering, and may not follow the primary physical science literature.

Regarding the recent slowdown in warming, here is what the IPCC said: “The observed global mean surface temperature (GMST) has shown a much smaller increasing linear trend over the past 15 years than over the past 30 to 60 years.” Yet 46 per cent of the Dutch survey respondents - nearly half - believe the warming trend has stayed the same or increased. And only 25 per cent agreed that global warming has been less than projected over the past 15 to 20 years, even though the IPCC reported that 111 out of 114 model projections overestimated warming since 1998.

Three quarters of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement “Climate is chaotic and cannot be predicted.” Here is what the IPCC said in its 2003 report: “In climate research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”

Looking into further detail there are other interesting ways in which the socalled experts are unaware of unresolved discrepancies between models and observations regarding issues like warming in the tropical troposphere and overall climate sensitivity.

What can we take away from all this? First, lots of people get called “climate experts” and contribute to the appearance of consensus, without necessarily being knowledgeable about core issues. A consensus among the misinformed is not worth much.

Second, it is obvious that the “97%” mantra is untrue. The underlying issues are so complex it is ludicrous to expect unanimity. The near 50/50 split among AMS members on the role of greenhouse gases is a much more accurate picture of the situation. The phoney claim of 97% consensus is mere political rhetoric aimed at stifling debate and intimidating people into silence.

The Canadian government has the unenviable task of defending the interest of the energy producers and consumers of a cold, thinly-populated country, in the face of furious, deafening global warming alarmism. Some of the worst of it is now emanating from the highest places. Barack Obama’s website (barackobama.com) says “97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and man-made … Find the deniers near you - and call them out today.” How nice. But what we really need to call out is the use of false propaganda and demagogy to derail factual debate and careful consideration of all facets of the most complex scientific and policy issue of our time.
- Ross McKitrick
Professor of Economics, University of Guelph
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/putting-con-consensus-not-only-there-no-97-cent-consensus-among-climate-scientists-many
SeaSnake
2017-08-09 15:29:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
global warming is bullshit.
I KNOW!

The southern hemisphere has been COOLING!


https://www.sott.net/article/353204-Southern-Hemisphere-cooling-trend-is-now-apparent

David Archibald has today given the most up to date information on our
Sun entering a grand solar minimum and the State of the Sun, now with
the past 5 winters under our belts we can look for trends. I present to
you the trend of a cooling Southern Hemisphere.


Ya know, a planet has TWO hemispheres.

HTH, little man Ball.
Bret Cahill
2017-08-09 18:46:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rudy Canoza
Every word you write about global warming is bullshit.
Not that anyone will ever pay him one cent as a Koch shill, but he's correct that it was hotter in the Big Banglocene.
Loading...