Hey Phil.They used permafrost samples**to come up with thosw numbers
AOC put out a new video on her Green New Deal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjLoHgvBhCI
Hey Phil.They used permafrost samples**to come up with thosw numbers
You think that just because a right wing government gets into power it somehow changes the bureaucracy at the senior levels? Doesn't work that way. Furthermore, there are many scientists on the skeptic side of climate change who cannot or choose not to speak out for fear of loss of income, intimidation from colleagues and/or special interests or legal action. Look at the case with James Cook University for exampleIf that were true, then how come scientists working under right wing governments all around the world still come up with the same answers?
Wouldn't those governments just buy some contrary researchers if it were that easy to fudge the results?
How come all the scientists in the US haven't changed their views on climate change now that Trump is in power?
Good thing she put that out now, because we have just another 12 years to liveHey Phil.
AOC put out a new video on her Green New Deal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjLoHgvBhCI
Sorry but I am absolutely more concerned about temperatures where I live and where all my food is produced near the surface than I am with what temperatures are in the upper atmosphere.Is it really your contention that warmer temperatures and more atmospheric co2 is bad for plant growth and crop yields?
You could try understanding what the image is showing.That doesnt change the fact your stupid map shows S. Ontario warming up, when clearly it isnt....
I guess you have never heard of these things launched into space called satellites that are sometimes fitted with sensitive equipment to measure temperature variations. Of course if you don't know about satellites then I'll assume you have never heard about black body radiation and infrared.Tell me specifically what is wrong with my statement? Are there weather station(s) in the Sahara Desert? In the Himalayan mountains? In the Amazon rain forest? In the Canadian Arctic there is 1 weather station in Eureka. 1 weather station for a land mass that is greater than the continental United States! How many weather buoys are in the oceans which comprise 70% of the planet? It's an absolute joke to say that we have an accurate surface temperature record today, let alone in 1950 or in 1900. Yet we have idiots who want to de carbonise the planet using this shitty data. They want us to go back to living in caves. Fucking twats.
Worst comeback ever!!You could try understanding what the image is showing
Suited your "back in my day" analysis.Worst comeback ever!!
Still waiting for palm trees in January in Toronto, honeypie :thumb:Suited your "back in my day" analysis.
You really are unable to follow the arguments.Still waiting for palm trees in January in Toronto, honeypie :thumb:
Until I see palm trees in January in Toronto, yes I am honeycake :applause:You really are unable to follow the arguments
No I don't deny that. But I don't think it poses a threat. I don't think its unusual in the course of climate history. And I think its a net benefit to society.Sorry but I am absolutely more concerned about temperatures where I live and where all my food is produced near the surface than I am with what temperatures are in the upper atmosphere.
Do you deny that surface temperatures (including the mountains and oceans) is rising?
Satellites cannot measure surface temperature I'm sure you are aware of that. So in order to determine what the surface temperature is in remote regions with no weather station they use GCM estimates. And we all know how well the GCM's have worked so farI guess you have never heard of these things launched into space called satellites that are sometimes fitted with sensitive equipment to measure temperature variations. Of course if you don't know about satellites then I'll assume you have never heard about black body radiation and infrared.
Yes, that's why the deniers rely on them, because the surface shows big warming.Satellites cannot measure surface temperature I'm sure you are aware of that.
Surface only shows big warming because a) data has been adjusted and b) weather stations have been closed in most rural locations. In other words it's fake.Yes, that's why the deniers rely on them, because the surface shows big warming.
It classic bait and switch and apparently works quite well on those who can't think through the arguments by themselves.
That's your standard of evidence? Wow. Were you drunk while posting?Still waiting for palm trees in January in Toronto, honeypie :thumb:
Ah, the conspiracy theory defense.Surface only shows big warming because a) data has been adjusted...
Get a sense of humor, dude.That's your standard of evidence? Wow. Were you drunk while posting?
Not a conspiracy an absolute fact. Stop being an ostrich.Ah, the conspiracy theory defense.