You should try posting some facts instead of just relying on bluster.
As usual, the facts on this completely disagree with you.
The world has barely 10 years to get climate change under control U.N. scientists say
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
As usual, the facts on this completely disagree with you.
During which of those eras did the planet struggle to support 7.5 billion?...
And you check this chart out and tell me earth warming/cooling cycles havent always happened historically ...
p.s. That solar radiation box is full of shit. It is pretty easy to compare the various solar cycles to the global temperature. Of course if you did that you would find that there is no way that solar activity could be the major driver of our current climactic changes.
I also recall a pretty major eruption in Iceland a few years ago. Yes, the atmospheric particulate caused the temperature in parts of the world to briefly drop but it hasn't had any impact on long term data.
Of course he's groggy, flubadub, .....Stop evading my question, Frankie. Here it is again:...
But even a broken clock (or fuji) is right on occasion.
Thats the key part, we have had over 100 years of industrial revolution and billions of people on earth putting put out their carbon footprint, and yet earth has only warmed up a tiny degree. That tells me global warming is overhyped.During which of those eras did the planet struggle to support 7.5 billion?
And we dont even know how much of that warming is manmade, and how much is part of earth's natural warming cycle
We all know its you, groggyYou are the one trying to avoid answering my questions here, Phil.
Your conspiracy theories about other members won't be discussed here by me
You have actually avoided my question, groggy. But I'll answer yours.So tell me again, what temperature does this 'highly respected climatologist' think that 2017 and 2019 will report on his chart?
Are you still avoiding answering my questions?
His chart still shows a warming trend in 2011. The dotted line after I'm assuming is his prediction, which does show a a large warming trend as well.
But this has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make, which is earth has gone through 4 major warming cycles before, and those could NOT have been caused by manmade CO2's because man wasnt burning fossil fuels back then. So how do you account for those 4 warming periods, groggy?? There had to be some other major factor in play.
I'll give you a hint: whats that large, ball of fire in the sky that gives off so much heat??
All this shows is that you are a very easy mark.His chart still shows a warming trend in 2011. The dotted line after I'm assuming is his prediction, which does show a a large warming trend as well.
Very easy to fool with fake charts and dodgy information.
You didn't notice there is no vertical scale, didn't notice that chart is so incredibly wrong about recent years that its totally untrustworthy.
Now you should also understand that 16 of the 17 warmest years since humans started collecting enough data to measure global temperature are all higher then 1998 is on your chart and would be too high to fit in the chart at all.
That chart is as useless as the rest of your claims.
Your 'point' is a claim made off a bullshit chart that is wrong.But this has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make, which is earth has gone through 4 major warming cycles before, and those could NOT have been caused by manmade CO2's because man wasnt burning fossil fuels back then.
Here's a more accurate representation of the last 2000 years.
CO2 levels are now higher then they have been for 800,000 years.
The latest IPCC report says we'll hit 1.5ºC in 12 years, which is likely double the height of your dodgy chart.
How many times do you think that has happened in the last 5000 years?
Fact: The world did not "reverse" the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by 2015. If the IPCC's predictions in 2007 were accurate, that means it's now "too late" to do anything.Are you trying to now admit that climate change is real but that you think its too late to save the planet so we should just all buy SUV's and enjoy ourselves?
The world signed on to Kyoto, then the US fucked it up.
The world then signed on to the Paris agreement and now Trump is fucking that up.
Right now the world is on track for about a 3ºC increase, with incredibly large changes needed to keep it to 1.5ºC and still very, very large changes needed to keep it to 2ºC.
Can you tell me whether Pachauri, in your NYT article, was talking about holding the planet to a 1.5ºC increase in temp or a 2ºC increase in global temperature?
Why do you continue to support actions that will increase the temp to 3ºC or more?
Conversely, if Frankfooter believes the current predictions are accurate, that can only mean the 2007 predictions were wrong.
But Frankfooter can't admit the IPCC was wrong because he has to believe the IPCC is infallible.
As I said, that's not science. It's religious faith.
Should I point out to you that Kyoto was in 1992 -- which was well before 2007 -- and Doha was only a statement of good intentions?Should I point out to you that the Paris agreement was an offshoot of Kyoto and Doha, or do you really think that agreement was all on its lonely?
Let's keep going.
For more than two years after the release of the 2007 report, the IPCC continued to insist the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035.
Tell us, Frankfooter: During that two-year period, did you believe the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035?
"Other members"? Franky's now claiming to be two different people?You are the one trying to avoid answering my questions here, Phil.
Your conspiracy theories about other members won't be discussed here by me.
That's hilarious.
If you're okay swallowing only a tiny bit of cyanide....... and yet earth has only warmed up a tiny degree. ...
So Frankie, are you now claiming earth has NEVER gone through hot/cold cycles like that chart shows throughout history??All this shows is that you are a very easy mark.
Very easy to fool with fake charts and dodgy information.
You didn't notice there is no vertical scale, didn't notice that chart is so incredibly wrong about recent years that its totally untrustworthy.
Now you should also understand that 16 of the 17 warmest years since humans started collecting enough data to measure global temperature are all higher then 1998 is on your chart and would be too high to fit in the chart at all.
That chart is as useless as the rest of your claims
I need a simple yes/no answer please.
Every time you eat the seed of an apricot, cherry, plum or peach, you eat a tiny bit of cyanide.If you're okay swallowing only a tiny bit of cyanide....
Please educate yourself some more
Thanks for confirming that the world has been working, albeit fairly ineffectually, to stop climate change since 1992.Should I point out to you that Kyoto was in 1992 -- which was well before 2007 -- and Doha was only a statement of good intentions?
Let's keep going.
For more than two years after the release of the 2007 report, the IPCC continued to insist the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035.
Tell us, Frankfooter: During that two-year period, did you believe the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035?
And thanks for also noting that after multiple attacks funded by fossil fuel industry that only 1 single error was ever found in the 2007 IPCC report.
An incredibly astounding job, really.
moviefan, the best you can ever do now is try picayune and/or pedantic arguments like the ones above.
As if one single error in a report by thousands of scientists was damning or as if the exact signing date on an international treaty signified the only point of action on climate change.
What is obvious is that you have no real arguments against the science.
The simple answer is that your chart is bullshit and the hot/cold cycles it depicts are not accurate.So Frankie, are you now claiming earth has NEVER gone through hot/cold cycles like that chart shows throughout history??
I need a simple yes/no answer please.
Do you really think that chart is still worth discussing even after you've been shown its garbage?
You really can't understand why that chart is garbage, can you?
Just as you really can't understand why it is you don't understand the science either.
No Frankie, please show us where the chart is garbage??The simple answer is that your chart is bullshit and the hot/cold cycles it depicts are not accurate.
Do you really think that chart is still worth discussing even after you've been shown its garbage?
You really can't understand why that chart is garbage, can you?
Just as you really can't understand why it is you don't understand the science either
Again, you really are stupid moviefan.No Frankie, please show us where the chart is garbage??
How many times do I need to tell you?
1) no vertical scale
2) no credits for where the data comes from
3) wrong numbers from 1998 on
4) ridiculous prediction for 2019 that is about 5 times less accurate then even your predictions.
Its so fucking stupid that this Cliff Harris dude (who apparently has no degree in anything) claims that his data comes from a super secret weather organization, a massive 60 person organization he's not allowed to tell you anything about. For realz.
http://www.longrangeweather.com/Long-Range-Weather-Trends.htm
Sorry moviefan, but you have to be really stupid to still not notice the errors and problems in this chart.
If the best you can come up with is a 7 year old chart that is this shoddy, you really should just give up and go back to your collection of beta videos.
Really stupid.
(Though I do appreciate the grade 5 level humour of trying to pass off a chart as legit when one if its author is named 'Randy Mann')
Hey Moviefan, this remind you of anything?
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-bet-final-outcome.html
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-bet-final-outcome.html
Let's try again.Thanks for confirming that the world has been working, albeit fairly ineffectually, to stop climate change since 1992.
And thanks for also noting that after multiple attacks funded by fossil fuel industry that only 1 single error was ever found in the 2007 IPCC report.
An incredibly astounding job, really.
moviefan, the best you can ever do now is try picayune and/or pedantic arguments like the ones above.
As if one single error in a report by thousands of scientists was damning or as if the exact signing date on an international treaty signified the only point of action on climate change.
What is obvious is that you have no real arguments against the science.
Frankfooter, the IPCC spent two years defending its assertion that the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035.
https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/e...odoo-sciencersquo-comment/article16839047.ece
Yes or no: During that time, did you believe the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035?
No Frankie, please show us where the chart is garbage??
"Sorry moviefan..."??Again, you really are stupid moviefan.
How many times do I need to tell you?
1) no vertical scale
2) no credits for where the data comes from
3) wrong numbers from 1998 on
4) ridiculous prediction for 2019 that is about 5 times less accurate then even your predictions.
Its so fucking stupid that this Cliff Harris dude (who apparently has no degree in anything) claims that his data comes from a super secret weather organization, a massive 60 person organization he's not allowed to tell you anything about. For realz.
http://www.longrangeweather.com/Long-Range-Weather-Trends.htm
Sorry moviefan, but you have to be really stupid to still not notice the errors and problems in this chart.
If the best you can come up with is a 7 year old chart that is this shoddy, you really should just give up and go back to your collection of beta videos.
Really stupid.
(Though I do appreciate the grade 5 level humour of trying to pass off a chart as legit when one if its author is named 'Randy Mann')
Um... how "really stupid" do you have to be to not realize that Phil C. McNasty and I are two different people? :frusty:
By the way, Groggy/Frankfooter, could you let the "other" Groggy/Frankfooters on TERB know that your statement that there's more than one of you is definitely getting added to your greatest hits on man-made global warming.
