ACTUAL SCIENTIST: "Climate Change is a Scam!"
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
Thank you for proving my point. Putting the word scientists in scare quotes provides absolutely no evidence they are wrong (but does show evidence of your viewpoint).Which "scientists",...???
Oh you mean if a liquids temperature is increased,...its volume increases,...wow,...didn't know that,...Are you really trying to say that the temperature/density relationship of sea water is off topic?
Besides that, seal levels have not "always" been rising and more importantly I'm not interested in whether seal levels impacted the dinosaurs. Rather I'm concerned about what rising sea levels are doing to human society now and what can be done to prevent further disastrous changes.
And holy crap fuji,...oh sorry,...basketcase,...just how the hell do you know that sea levels have not always been rising,...???
I give a shit what your concerns are,...are you suggesting that we should have started sand bagging in the 1800"s,...when sea levels were rising,...over concerns of "rising sea levels are doing to human society now" .
You brought up that sea levels were rising during the dinosaur era,...sounds like its a pretty natural occurance in nature,...so I guess one could now state that nature got it all wrong,...and is the blame for sea levels rising,...interesting.
Thanks for proving my point,...you don't know which "scientists",...Thank you for proving my point. Putting the word scientists in scare quotes provides absolutely no evidence they are wrong (but does show evidence of your viewpoint).
So you get to make the grand proclamation who is a "credible scientist",...and who isn't,...wow,...you get more elite every day fuji,...in your warped mind,...anyway.And FAST goes down in flames babbling nonsense and hurling insults as usual.
Point made: No credible scientist disagrees with human caused global warming.
/Thread
And extremely narrow minded at the same time though
I'm not the one proclaiming anything. The peer reviewers at Nature and Science are.So you get to make the grand proclamation who is a "credible scientist",...and who isn't,...wow,...you get more elite every day fuji,...in your warped mind,...anyway.
And extremely narrow minded at the same time though
Your grand fuji proclamation,...I'm not the one proclaiming anything. The peer reviewers at Nature and Science are.
,..."No credible scientist disagrees with human caused global warming",...period.
Even IF two magazines did state something to that effect,...who gives a shit if two magazines believe they are in a position to decide who is credible and not,...peer pressure is not democratic.
Last edited:
You could prove me wrong by showing an article in a top journal like Nature or Science stating that global warming isn't real. But you can't. There's no such article.Your grand fuji proclamation,...
,..."No credible scientist disagrees with human caused global warming",...period.
Even IF two magazines did state something to that effect,...who gives a shit if two magazines believe they are in a position to decide who is credible and not,...peer pressure is not democratic.
You only find those articles in third rate journals with no standards or low standards.
Your use of the term "peer pressure" proves you don't have any fucking clue what peer review means.
The only point I'm interested in is this one: global warming has been confirmed by 100% of the scientists and studies credible enough to get published in the top journals.
You don't know what you are talking about. Nothing in the articles you linked disputes anything about global warming.
I won you lost!
http://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...on-boffins-cast-shock-DOUBT-on-global-warming
Has climate change been disproved? Large Hadron boffins cast shock DOUBT on global warming
MANKIND'S burning of fossil fuels may not be the primary cause of global warming, according to the shock results of a new study by scientists behind the Large Hadron Collider (LCH).
By JON AUSTIN
PUBLISHED: 03:31, Sat, May 28, 2016 | UPDATED: 08:21, Sat, May 28, 2016
Scientists behind the LHC (right) have cast doubt on global warming predictions
Boffins from CERN have also discovered projected temperature increases over the next century may have been over estimated.
Researchers found trees may have been putting similar aerosols into the air as burning fossil fuels, long before the industrial revolution, meaning humans may have had less impact on the climate than we thought.
Scientists made the discovery during an experiment to create an artificial cloud that was thought could help cool Earth and reverse global warming.
A study published this week in the journal Nature has looked more closely at the tiny particles within clouds, known as cloud seeds, that help cool the planet and found they can be produced naturally.
Nature: Ion-induced nucleation of pure biogenic particles
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture10343.html
Clouds, including natural ones and those from aerosols, are seen by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as the single biggest source of uncertainty about the so-called human-caused climate change.
The problem stems from not knowing how cloudy the world was before the industrial era, and the fact that some of the gases produced by burning fossil fuels said to warm the plant in the long-term, actually help cool it in the short-term through cloud formation.
But now CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, have left the issue even more confusing after discovering, while creating the fake cloud, that trees could have been putting these aerosols into the atmosphere since they first grew at the time of the dinosaurs.
Their scientists run the Large Hadron Collider (LCH).- the world's biggest physics experiment in Geneva, Switzerland.
To make matters more confusing, there are two types of partials.
Direct aerosol particles come from dust, sea salt, and the burning of biomass.
Secondary aerosol particles are formed when gas is converted into a particle, and are responsible for more than half of all cloud seeds in our atmosphere.
Until this study, scientists thought sulphuric acid, largely produced with fossil fuel emissions, was needed to form secondary aerosols, and therefore responsible for the bulk of global warming aerosols.
However, the research found the Earth actually produces these particles naturally, without any interference from man.
RELATED ARTICLES
We found that nature produces particles without pollution. That is going to require a rethink of how human activities have increased aerosols in clouds.
Jasper Kirkby, CERN particle physicist
The particles are created by a mix of tree vapours and cosmic rays - high-energy particles bombarding the atmosphere from outside our solar system.
Jasper Kirkby, CERN particle physicist and originator and spokesperson of the CLOUD experiment, said: "We found that nature produces particles without pollution.
"That is going to require a rethink of how human activities have increased aerosols in clouds."
The results may turn the whole climate change debate and projected temperature increases upside down, they said.
Climate change projections had always taken it that the amount of aerosol seeded clouds in the pre-industrial age would have been much less than since industrialisation.
But the findings mean the amounts could have been the same or just slightly less.
An abundance of clouds in the preindustrial era - something the new study hints at - would mean less warming in the future.
This means current estimates of projected warming in the 21st century could be reduced, the study concluded.
Inside the Large Hadron Collider
Tue, October 20, 2015
Pictures of The Large Hadron Collider which is the worlds most powerful particle accelerator held in Geneva, Switzerland.
PLAY SLIDESHOW
The Large Hadron Collider GETTY IMAGES
1 of 20
The Large Hadron Collider CMS detecter held in Geneva, Switzerland
RELATED ARTICLES:
Compared to the massive LCH, the cloud chamber for the Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD) experiment at CERN was just a three-metre-wide stainless-steel chamber.
Inside, experts used vapours to recreate Earth’s atmosphere before injecting ultraviolet rays to simulate sunlight.
And where in that paper does it say that cloud formation due to solar activity plays a larger role than human produced CO2?
As I said, of course it plays a role but years of analysis comparing solar activity to increasing global temperature has shown a weak correlation meaning that solar driven cloud formation is not the main driving force.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...on-boffins-cast-shock-DOUBT-on-global-warming
Has climate change been disproved? Large Hadron boffins cast shock DOUBT on global warming
MANKIND'S burning of fossil fuels may not be the primary cause of global warming, according to the shock results of a new study by scientists behind the Large Hadron Collider (LCH).
By JON AUSTIN
PUBLISHED: 03:31, Sat, May 28, 2016 | UPDATED: 08:21, Sat, May 28, 2016
Scientists behind the Large Hadron Collider LHC (right) have cast doubt on global warming predictions
Boffins from CERN have also discovered projected temperature increases over the next century may have been over estimated.
Researchers found trees may have been putting similar aerosols into the air as burning fossil fuels, long before the industrial revolution, meaning humans may have had less impact on the climate than we thought.
Scientists made the discovery during an experiment to create an artificial cloud that was thought could help cool Earth and reverse global warming.
A study published this week in the journal Nature has looked more closely at the tiny particles within clouds, known as cloud seeds, that help cool the planet and found they can be produced naturally.
Nature: Ion-induced nucleation of pure biogenic particles
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture10343.html
Clouds, including natural ones and those from aerosols, are seen by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as the single biggest source of uncertainty about the so-called human-caused climate change.
The problem stems from not knowing how cloudy the world was before the industrial era, and the fact that some of the gases produced by burning fossil fuels said to warm the plant in the long-term, actually help cool it in the short-term through cloud formation.
But now CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, have left the issue even more confusing after discovering, while creating the fake cloud, that trees could have been putting these aerosols into the atmosphere since they first grew at the time of the dinosaurs.
Their scientists run the Large Hadron Collider (LCH).- the world's biggest physics experiment in Geneva, Switzerland.
To make matters more confusing, there are two types of partials.
Direct aerosol particles come from dust, sea salt, and the burning of biomass.
Secondary aerosol particles are formed when gas is converted into a particle, and are responsible for more than half of all cloud seeds in our atmosphere.
Until this study, scientists thought sulphuric acid, largely produced with fossil fuel emissions, was needed to form secondary aerosols, and therefore responsible for the bulk of global warming aerosols.
However, the research found the Earth actually produces these particles naturally, without any interference from man.
RELATED ARTICLES
We found that nature produces particles without pollution. That is going to require a rethink of how human activities have increased aerosols in clouds.
Jasper Kirkby, CERN particle physicist
The particles are created by a mix of tree vapours and cosmic rays - high-energy particles bombarding the atmosphere from outside our solar system.
Jasper Kirkby, CERN particle physicist and originator and spokesperson of the CLOUD experiment, said: "We found that nature produces particles without pollution.
"That is going to require a rethink of how human activities have increased aerosols in clouds."
The results may turn the whole climate change debate and projected temperature increases upside down, they said.
Climate change projections had always taken it that the amount of aerosol seeded clouds in the pre-industrial age would have been much less than since industrialisation.
But the findings mean the amounts could have been the same or just slightly less.
An abundance of clouds in the preindustrial era - something the new study hints at - would mean less warming in the future.
This means current estimates of projected warming in the 21st century could be reduced, the study concluded.
Inside the Large Hadron Collider
Tue, October 20, 2015
Pictures of The Large Hadron Collider which is the worlds most powerful particle accelerator held in Geneva, Switzerland.
PLAY SLIDESHOW
The Large Hadron Collider GETTY IMAGES
1 of 20
The Large Hadron Collider CMS detector.
While I agree that minimizing pollution is important (God knows, it could cause cancers), isn't there a correlation of increased levels of C02 with rising Global average temperatures? C02 affects the Greenhouse Effect.You guys always need to open up with an insult to add some extra illegitimate argument to your response. Pollution is a problem that needs to be minimized regardless of what effect you think it has on the climate. We can reverse everything you bring up and although it would benefit us all to have clean air, food and water none of it will stop climate change. We didn't cause the ice age(s) and we didn't melt em either, so stop believing humans are causing the climate to change by using any form of activity as evidence...that is the moral to my silly story.
... and they don't explain how trees contribute except for mumbo jumbo on aerosols. I thought trees consume CO2 and emit Oxygen? What other particles or aerosols do they emit to exacerbate global warming? The article doesn't get into that.Neither of those articles say global warming isn't caused by humans. You are clueless!
You know there is a weird correlation between increase in consumption of ice cream with the increase in shark attack.. LOL. Here the correlation when the Weather is very hot ... ice cream consumption increases and also people go to the beaches and swim on the beaches ... and lo behold sharks see more people in the water ( beaches) and the shark attack increases!While I agree that minimizing pollution is important (God knows, it could cause cancers), isn't there a correlation of increased levels of C02 with rising Global average temperatures? C02 affects the Greenhouse Effect.
Here is the question. Do ice cream consumption has a direct causes in shark attacks?
Bottom line climate is very complicated and complex system... Do climate scientists know everything?
We cannot even find the cure for the common cold! Don't be surprised in a decade from now AGW climate (man made global warming " rebranded as climate changes") is proven that wrong!
AL Gore will eat crow and peoples will take Mann Hockey stick and hit him over the head. 1.5 trillions dollars per year worldwide wasted on climate changes .
http://www.cfact.org/2015/08/22/climate-crisis-inc-has-become-a-1-5-trillion-industry/
People could use the money to spend on research for cancer or money spend elsewhere for better of mankind
Says the guy who puts the word scientist in scare quotes in a sad attempt to undermine the masses of research you oppose out of bias. At least pornadict actually looks at some science.So you get to make the grand proclamation who is a "credible scientist",.....
Has climate change been disproved?...
Sweet. You can repeatedly paste a news release about a study. Do you care to quote from the actual study where it says CO2 is not a major player in climate change? (might be hard because your link doesn't work).
Of course it seems to escape your notice that the press release discusses the impact on natural aerosols on cloud formation, not the impact of solar activity vs CO2 on global temperature changes. And if you are such a strong advocate of solar activity as the main player then why are you now arguing that natural aerosol production is the real cause?
The press release even discusses how naturally created aerosols may equal the impact of fossil fuel emissions. If they are equal, that means humans have doubled the impact. Despite the spin of the journalist, it seems that the study actually reinforces how significant human activity is to changing climate.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...on-boffins-cast-shock-DOUBT-on-global-warmingSweet. You can repeatedly paste a news release about a study. Do you care to quote from the actual study where it says CO2 is not a major player in climate change? (might be hard because your link doesn't work).
Of course it seems to escape your notice that the press release discusses the impact on natural aerosols on cloud formation, not the impact of solar activity vs CO2 on global temperature changes. And if you are such a strong advocate of solar activity as the main player then why are you now arguing that natural aerosol production is the real cause?
The press release even discusses how naturally created aerosols may equal the impact of fossil fuel emissions. If they are equal, that means humans have doubled the impact. Despite the spin of the journalist, it seems that the study actually reinforces how significant human activity is to changing climate.
PornAddict, I doubt that the connection between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is as silly as your overly simplistic attempt with an analogy for causality. (If you said that man-made GW increases the likelihood of shark attacks, that might appear more credible).You know there is a weird correlation between increase in shark attack with increase in consumption of ice cream! LOL. Here the correlation when the Weather is very hot ... ice cream consumption increases and also people go to the beaches and then swim on the beaches and lo behold sharks see more people in the water beaches and the shark attack increases! Here is the question. Do ice cream consumption has a direct causes in shark attacks?
Bottom line climate is very complicated and complex system... You as human climate scientists know everything? We cannot even find the cure for the common cold! Don't be surprised in a decade from now AGW climate (man made global warming " rebranded as climate changes") is proven that wrong! AL Gore will eat crow and people will take Mann Hockey stick and hit him over the head. 1.5 trillions dollars per year worldwide wasted on climate changes . People could use the money to spend on research for cancer or money spend elsewhere for better of mankind
Also, don't you also refer to "human" scientists in your CERN citation, that you rely on to debunk the man-made greenhouse gas emission theory?
Of course climate change if very complicated and complex. I will agree with you that the majority of scientists or that consensus, might be off the mark or not have all the answers.
So can you answer my question and explain that CERN article? How do trees contribute to global warming given that trees consume CO2 and emit oxygen?
PornAddict, I doubt that the connection between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is as silly as your overly simplistic attempt with an analogy for causality. (If you said that man-made GW increases the likelihood of shark attacks, that might appear more credible).
Also, don't you also refer to "human" scientists in your CERN citation, that you rely on to debunk the man-made greenhouse gas emission theory?
Of course climate change if very complicated and complex. I will agree with you that the majority of scientists or that consensus, might be off the mark or not have all the answers.
So can you answer my question and explain that CERN article? How do trees contribute to global warming given that trees consume CO2 and emit oxygen?
Researchers found trees may have been putting similar aerosols into the air as burning fossil fuels, long before the industrial revolution, meaning humans may have had less impact on the climate than we thought.
Scientists made the discovery during an experiment to create an artificial cloud that was thought could help cool Earth and reverse global warming.
A study published this week in the journal Nature has looked more closely at the tiny particles within clouds, known as cloud seeds, that help cool the planet and found they can be produced naturally.
The article CERN article never said tree contributed to global warming! Tree do consume CO2 and do emit O2 basic biology! Tree emits arsenal that help cool the planet when cloud is form! Don't You agree when you go outside the weather tend to be more cooler when there is cloud vs no clouds! Clouds block the sun!
Also here another pulished in Nature article:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v506/n7489/pdf/nature13032.pdf
Forests emit large quantities of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to the atmosphere. Their condensable oxidation products can form secondary organic aerosol, a significant and ubiquitous component of atmospheric aerosol1, 2, which is known to affect the Earth’s radiation balance by scattering solar radiation and by acting as cloud condensation nuclei3. The quantitative assessment of such climate effects remains hampered by a number of factors, including an incomplete understanding of how biogenic VOCs contribute to the formation of atmospheric secondary organic aerosol. The growth of newly formed particles from sizes of less than three nanometres up to the sizes of cloud condensation nuclei (about one hundred nanometres) in many continental ecosystems requires abundant, essentially non-volatile organic vapours4, 5, 6, but the sources and compositions of such vapours remain unknown. Here we investigate the oxidation of VOCs, in particular the terpene α-pinene, under atmospherically relevant conditions in chamber experiments. We find that a direct pathway leads from several biogenic VOCs, such as monoterpenes, to the formation of large amounts of extremely low-volatility vapours. These vapours form at significant mass yield in the gas phase and condense irreversibly onto aerosol surfaces to produce secondary organic aerosol, helping to explain the discrepancy between the observed atmospheric burden of secondary organic aerosol and that reported by many model studies2. We further demonstrate how these low-volatility vapours can enhance, or even dominate, the formation and growth of aerosol particles over forested regions, providing a missing link between biogenic VOCs and their conversion to aerosol particles. Our findings could help to improve assessments of biosphere–aerosol–climate feedback mechanisms6, 7, 8, and the air quality and climate effects of biogenic emissions generally.
This earlier article is linked to Porn Addicts CERN article. GW is understated.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/62...k-Burning-fossil-fuels-COOLs-planet-says-NASA
It explains the effect of aerosols other than CO2, which have a cooling effect in certain parts of the world, but that earlier models did not take them into account for GW projections, and are therefore, UNDERSTATED. (In other words, the earlier projections were already netted from the cooling effect of man-made aerosols and deforestation, therefore, GROSS warming effects are higher).
But the CERN article discovers that trees ALSO produce these aerosols, which would mean that when taken into account, will lower temperature projections. However, it just means a deferral of the consequences of GW.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/62...k-Burning-fossil-fuels-COOLs-planet-says-NASA
It explains the effect of aerosols other than CO2, which have a cooling effect in certain parts of the world, but that earlier models did not take them into account for GW projections, and are therefore, UNDERSTATED. (In other words, the earlier projections were already netted from the cooling effect of man-made aerosols and deforestation, therefore, GROSS warming effects are higher).
But the CERN article discovers that trees ALSO produce these aerosols, which would mean that when taken into account, will lower temperature projections. However, it just means a deferral of the consequences of GW.
Researchers found trees may have been putting similar aerosols into the air as burning fossil fuels, long before the industrial revolution, meaning humans may have had less impact on the climate than we thought.
Scientists made the discovery during an experiment to create an artificial cloud that was thought could help cool Earth and reverse global warming.
A study published this week in the journal Nature has looked more closely at the tiny particles within clouds, known as cloud seeds, that help cool the planet and found they can be produced naturally.
The article CERN article never said tree contributed to global warming! Tree do consume CO2 and do emit O2 basic biology! Tree emits arsenal that help cool the planet.
Also here another article with a link showing ...
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v506/n7489/pdf/nature13032.pdf
OKAY. I also read your CERN article again, and found the earlier article which explains those aerosols (see the link in the CERN article for that earlier article actually help cool it in the short-term through cloud formation). Those aerosols are other gases I guess that are emitted into the atmosphere which also help cool the earth. BUT it didn't say that man-made global warming doesn't exist or is dis-proven, just that projections have to be re-calculated to take them into account, which would mean LOWER temperatures (contrary to the earlier article which said that projections were underestimated, but that was before the discovery of these aerosols also emitted by trees which is covered in the CERN article).
From that same CERN Article:
Despite the findings, Mr Kirby stopped short of saying humans played no role in global warming, but stressed projected increases in temperature will come down.
He said: "Human impact is not going to go away.
"Temperature will still go up and warming will still occur. But now that we’ve got this important result that is going to pin down the pre-industrial atmosphere, it’s going to sharpen our results and shrink the range of predictions."
So they aren't saying that man-made GW is not real.
