Toronto Escorts

Amidst Global Warming Hysteria, NASA Expects Global Cooling

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,726
2,393
113
You've been called out for lying about the results of this poll.
And now you're trying to change the subject, typical denier.
And you have been called out for lying soooooooooo many time we have lost count
Sorry Frankfurt / Groggy you do not get to play the dishonesty card




Explain the theory in detail which you claim is stupid

Q1. Tell us what the IPCC uses as the mean absorption time of C02 in their models ?

Q2. Why have the actual temperatures been coming in significantly lower than IPCC predictions ?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
82,996
18,726
113
Science is not a proven or disproven by polls stupid
One formulates a hypothesis and tests that hypothesis against actual scientific data continuously.
.
Of course not.

What it shows is that there is no credible alternate theory to explain the warming we are experiencing.
The hypothesis at work here are old and well known:
1 - The greenhouse effect
2 - CO2 effect as a greenhouse gas
3 - rising CO2 leads to the greenhouse effect and rising global temperatures

Those are basic, larue.
Do you debate those hypothesis?
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
60,125
6,419
113
That is so ironic as many scientists who do not tow the party line on Climate Change have had their funding cut off, ....
So starts the conspiracy theories. But whatever excuses you need to make for ignoring what the vast majority of scientists conclude.



p.s. You pretending to be neutral on this is as sad as groggy pretending to support human rights.
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,726
2,393
113
Answer: They haven't.
The projections have been amazingly accurate.
Really ????
This appears to indicate otherwise
https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/climate-models-versus-climate-reality/







Now answer the question put to you
Q1. Tell us what the IPCC uses as the mean absorption time of C02 in their models ?

Do not post a link

State the value used in the IPCC models
I do not think you know the value
I do not think you understand what the number means
I do not think you understand what role it plays
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,726
2,393
113
So starts the conspiracy theories. But whatever excuses you need to make for ignoring what the vast majority of scientists conclude.

p.s. You pretending to be neutral on this is as sad as groggy pretending to support human rights.
Thanks for proving what I am stating

I point out that the only response you will accept is either 100% complete agreement with you or I am a labelled a denier.
You do not allow anyone to evaluate what they know and make their own determination

I explicit state I am neutral on the issue and neither accept nor deny the hypothesis.
The debate is not over and never should be over.

Your response is to tell me: That I am lying when I state I am neutral

ie you refuse to allow me to have a view which deviates for your and you call me a lair

Socrates
When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser.
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,726
2,393
113
So starts the conspiracy theories. But whatever excuses you need to make for ignoring what the vast majority of scientists conclude.
1. A scientific hypothesis is not determined by consensus opinion
It is determined by testing the experimental data vs. the hypothesis estimate.

2. Conspiracy??????? Do you deny these scientists have not experienced research funding cuts , career impairment and character assassination ?
Because they question the hypothesis ?
 

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,726
2,393
113
Of course not.

What it shows is that there is no credible alternate theory to explain the warming we are experiencing.
The hypothesis at work here are old and well known:
1 - The greenhouse effect
2 - CO2 effect as a greenhouse gas
3 - rising CO2 leads to the greenhouse effect and rising global temperatures

Those are basic, larue.
Do you debate those hypothesis?
And you think a poll result proves this hypothesis?

Are there any other possible causes for rising global temperatures?

Now answer the question put to you
Q1. Tell us what the IPCC uses as the mean absorption time of C02 in their models ?

Do not post a link

State the value used in the IPCC models
I do not think you know the value
I do not think you understand what the number means
I do not think you understand what role it plays
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,398
6,732
113
Room 112
Answer: They haven't.
The projections have been amazingly accurate.

You keep posting this doctored graph. Everyone knows the models have far too high a CO2 sensitivity. Seems like you're really the denier here.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
82,996
18,726
113
You are very easy to fool, aren't you, larue?

You picked a chart from Judith Curry, a dodgy source, and didn't notice that it compares apples to oranges.
The IPCC line is from IPCC global surface temperature projections and Judith dishonestly compares it to atmospheric temperature readings from balloons and satellites.

Really, if you aren't bright enough to notice something that stupidly dishonest, you really should bow out of this discussion.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
82,996
18,726
113
You keep posting this doctored graph. Everyone knows the models have far too high a CO2 sensitivity. Seems like you're really the denier here.
That chart comes from Gavin Schmidt, head of NASA's GISS program.
https://www.giss.nasa.gov/staff/gschmidt/

You are accusing NASA of doctoring charts, that's a serious allegation and you need to have very solid evidence to back up this claim.
Otherwise, you're just full of shit.
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,398
6,732
113
Room 112
That chart comes from Gavin Schmidt, head of NASA's GISS program.
https://www.giss.nasa.gov/staff/gschmidt/

You are accusing NASA of doctoring charts, that's a serious allegation and you need to have very solid evidence to back up this claim.
Otherwise, you're just full of shit.
Schmidt is one of the lead perpetrators of this fraud. By far I'm not the only one who believes that. 49 former NASA scientists agree with me.
https://business.financialpost.com/...llistic-over-agencys-bias-over-climate-change
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,398
6,732
113
Room 112
You are very easy to fool, aren't you, larue?

You picked a chart from Judith Curry, a dodgy source, and didn't notice that it compares apples to oranges.
The IPCC line is from IPCC global surface temperature projections and Judith dishonestly compares it to atmospheric temperature readings from balloons and satellites.

Really, if you aren't bright enough to notice something that stupidly dishonest, you really should bow out of this discussion.
Judith Curry is likely the most honest broker in the climate change debate. I'll take her over the shysters Schmidt, Hansen, Mann, Jones, Briffa, Hayhoe any day.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
82,996
18,726
113

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
60,125
6,419
113
A scientific hypothesis is not determined by consensus opinion....
But hundreds and hundreds of individual papers reaching the same conclusion says something (that you want to ignore).

The consensus is not because people are just agreeing with each other for the sake of it but because that is what the data actually supports.
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,398
6,732
113
Room 112

JohnLarue

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2005
16,726
2,393
113
You are very easy to fool, aren't you, larue?

You picked a chart from Judith Curry, a dodgy source, and didn't notice that it compares apples to oranges.
The IPCC line is from IPCC global surface temperature projections and Judith dishonestly compares it to atmospheric temperature readings from balloons and satellites.

Really, if you aren't bright enough to notice something that stupidly dishonest, you really should bow out of this discussion.

https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/17/c...imate-reality/
It isn’t the usual comparison between global average surface temperature and the current family of general circulation climate models. Instead, it’s the forecast and observed temperatures for the middle troposphere.
What’s the advantage of looking at these temperatures versus those at the surface?

Rain and snow are largely dependent upon the temperature difference between the surface and the mid-troposphere. When there’s little difference, air in the lower atmosphere does not rise, meaning that the vertical motion required to form a cloud is absent. When the difference is large, moisture-laden surface air is very buoyant and can result in intense rain events.

Getting the difference systematically wrong in a climate model means getting the rainfall wrong, which pretty much invalidates regional temperature forecasts. A dry surface (think: desert) warms (and cools) much more rapidly than a wet one. If the computer models are somehow getting surface temperatures right that could only be a fortuitous result if the midtropospheric temperatures are as far off as Christy’s data shows.

Indeed, the models have this temperature differential dead wrong. Over the period of study, they say it should be remaining the same. But, in fact, it is growing in the real world, at a rate nine times what is predicted by the models over this study period.
1. So you did not understand what you were looking at before you labelled Judith Curry as dishonest. (I am surprised you did not shout "lock her up")
2. It is not Judith Curry's work. Its JR Christy's work from the University of Alabama

More character assassination from Frankfooter
I thought we agreed you were going to stop that
Socrates :
When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser.
You do not even know who you need to smear, so you just smear everyone with a dissenting view
Please slither away or

Answer the question put to you
Q1. Tell us what the IPCC uses as the mean absorption time of C02 in their models ?

Do not post a link

State the value used in the IPCC models
I do not think you know the value
I do not think you understand what the number means
I do not think you understand what role it plays
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts