Weather stations in Antarctica did not even exist in the 1st half
of the 20th century. You can be sure that temperature data passed
as global temperature from the time before industrial revolution is
bogus.
The Biggest Contributors to Global Warming As Joe Biden Holds Climate Summit
- Thread starter oil&gas
- Start date
of the 20th century. You can be sure that temperature data passed
as global temperature from the time before industrial revolution is
bogus.
Hahaha okay...I didn't realize we had scientific geniuses on a pooner board who know better than 97%+ of climate scientists.
I probably have crossed path with more climate scientists than anyone
on this board. Go visit environmental Canada to seek out some of our
nation's climate scientists and ask them not what to believe but what
to do to prepare for the impending climate change catastrophe.
on this board. Go visit environmental Canada to seek out some of our
nation's climate scientists and ask them not what to believe but what
to do to prepare for the impending climate change catastrophe.
Which is it, do you believe them about the science and you just don't care, or do you think larue is way smarter than all of them?
And what about those Shell and Exxon scientists who came up with the same findings?
Ha Ha?
What is the question that you think 97%+ of climate scientists agree with?
I bet you get it wrong
You might also consider looking into how many physics and chemistry courses are required to become "A climate scientist"
Last edited:
You got it wrong.Ha Ha?
What is the question that you think 97%+ of climate scientists agree with?
I bet you get it wrong
Check the IPCC.
That is your source? OMG...yeah I am laughing at you. SMHHa Ha?
What is the question that you think 97%+ of climate scientists agree with?
I bet you get it wrong
You are laughing but can not address the question ??
Can you provide a single peer reviewed paper showing verifiable evidence that humans co2 emissions are causing climate change?
Can you even explain the mechanism of the theoretical absorption of infrared radiation by " greenhouse gasses"?
here this diagram might hep
be sure to explain what the blue shaded area is in terms of the limited frequencies where Co2 absorbs radiation ?
Once you are done that explain how the global warming theory overcomes the Beer-Lambert Law of logarithmic absorption ?
Do not lose sight of the fact Co2 is measured in parts per million, the change in atmospheric concentration over a hundred years is 0.01% and that absorption is a physical and not a chemical effect
Still laughing?
run away now
Last edited:
haha....Yeah I'm laughing at you.You are laughing but can not address the question ??
Can you provide a single peer reviewed paper showing verifiable evidence that humans co2 emissions are causing climate change?
Can you even explain the mechanism of the theoretical absorption of infrared radiation by " greenhouse gasses"?
here this diagram might hep
be sure to explain what the blue shaded area is in terms of the limited frequencies where Co2 absorbs radiation ?
Once you are done that explain how the global warming theory overcomes the Beer-Lambert Law of logarithmic absorption ?
Do not lose sight of the fact Co2 is measured in parts per million, the change in atmospheric concentration over a hundred years is 0.01% and that absorption is a physical and not a chemical effect
Still laughing?
run away now
My bad....I didn't realize I was in the presence of a scientific genius. You should write a paper. You obviously deserve a Nobel prize.
LOL
You seem to know what you are talking about. Care to show me a study
where I can learn about how climate scientists' convinced themselves their
pre-industrial global temperature data are as accurate as the global temperature
data obtained in this century
Last edited:
Not really. You can Google it yourself.
I'm bored of this.
The facts are that I don't claim to know better than the thousands of trained scientists and climate experts and I would never rely on the scientific accuracy of opinions of stranger on a escort review board.
Keep posting..I will keep laughing even if I can't be bothered to reply.
You don't have to know better than trained climate scientists to
check out facts about their scientific accuracy and opinions. You have
to be an imbecile to pretend to speak for those reliable climate
scientists before you at least find out the opinion on how accurate
is their scientific accuracy of pre-industrial global temperature within
their own community.
You should read the latest IPCC reports.
IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
www.ipcc.ch
They'll show you summaries of all those studies, with links to the work and confidence levels for all historic and paleontological climate records.
But you won't do that, will you?
Are you pretending to speak for climatologists and their confidence levels on their work?
Or would you read their works and actually find out?
IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
www.ipcc.ch
You mock what you do not understand?
You do not have a clue about the science and just accept whatever propaganda has been fed to you
Yet you have an opinion??
What is the value of the completely uniformed opinion of a sheepeople??
Zero
You do understand a mind is a terrible thing to waste ?
That is not laughable, that is pathetic
Do you enjoy being a sheepeople?
Last edited:
Oh no....you're such a keyboard warrior scaring me and making me runaway!!! Ohhhh noooo!!!! Look at me run!
I just doesn't make sense for me to argue with idiots. It's the same as arguing with flatearthers, anti-vaxers, those who deny the moon landing, those who believe in sasquatch, etc.
Last edited:
Yes, the value of uninformed opinions is zero.
As opposed to the value of legit science.
IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
www.ipcc.ch
Hey its a sheepeople at full gallop, running away
Actual it just doesn't make sense for you to argue when you do not understand the subject matter, yet somehow have an uneducated, predefined and uncompromising opinion and you start the discussion with an insulting and stupid remark
Still expecting to see satellite data from 1850 ?
And you call me an idiot?
Now slither away before you embarrass yourself further
