Climate Change

[Skoob]

You are so clueless.

The ‘97% climate consensus’ is over. Now it’s well above 99% (and the evidence is even stronger than that)

One of the most famous stats in the climate debate is the 97% of scientists who endorse the consensus on human-induced global heating. Ahead of the Glasgow summit, that figure has climbed even higher.

theconversation.com

You are so gullible.
A for-profit website that was used to search for reports. Yep, no bias there.
And you use this as your proof that 99.9% of scientists believe this is all true? That's quite deceptive of you.

btw volcano eruptions are now caused by climate change? hahahahaha that's funny.

 

[Frankfooter]

You are so gullible.
A for-profit website that was used to search for reports. Yep, no bias there.
And you use this as your proof that 99.9% of scientists believe this is all true? That's quite deceptive of you.

btw volcano eruptions are now caused by climate change? hahahahaha that's funny.

Skoob, your ignorance is constantly surprising.
This was an article that cited a scientific paper, the link was in the first paragraph.
Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature
Mark Lynas4,1, Benjamin Z Houlton2 and Simon Perry3
Published 19 October 2021 • © 2021 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd


Our finding is that the broadly-defined scientific consensus likely far exceeds 99% regarding the role of anthropogenic GHG emissions in modern climate change, and may even be as high as 99.9%. Of course, the prevalence of mis/disinformation about the role of GHG emissions in modern climate change is unlikely to be driven purely by genuine scientific illiteracy or lack of understanding [14]. Even so, in our view it remains important to continue to inform society on the state of the evidence. According to the IPCC AR6 summary and many other previous studies, mitigating future warming requires urgent efforts to eliminate fossil fuels combustion and other major sources of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Our study helps confirm that there is no remaining scientific uncertainty about the urgency and gravity of this task.

 

[Skoob]

Skoob, your ignorance is constantly surprising.
This was an article that cited a scientific paper, the link was in the first paragraph.
Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature
Mark Lynas4,1, Benjamin Z Houlton2 and Simon Perry3
Published 19 October 2021 • © 2021 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd
Our finding is that the broadly-defined scientific consensus likely far exceeds 99% regarding the role of anthropogenic GHG emissions in modern climate change, and may even be as high as 99.9%. Of course, the prevalence of mis/disinformation about the role of GHG emissions in modern climate change is unlikely to be driven purely by genuine scientific illiteracy or lack of understanding [14]. Even so, in our view it remains important to continue to inform society on the state of the evidence. According to the IPCC AR6 summary and many other previous studies, mitigating future warming requires urgent efforts to eliminate fossil fuels combustion and other major sources of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Our study helps confirm that there is no remaining scientific uncertainty about the urgency and gravity of this task.

The article you shared said this:

Both studies searched the Web of Science database – an independent worldwide repository of scientific paper citations – using the keywords “global climate change” and “global warming”. However, the recent study added “climate change” to the other two keyword searches, because the authors found that most climate-contrarian papers would not have been returned with only the two original terms.


The link in the first paragraph essentially said the same thing:

2. Method
Previous attempts to quantify the consensus on climate change have employed many different methodologies, varying from expert elicitation to examination of abstracts returned by a keyword search. We base our methodology on C13 with some important refinements. We searched the Web of Science for English language 'articles' added between the dates of 2012 and November 2020 with the keywords 'climate change', 'global climate change' and 'global warming'.

Do you even read the bs you post?

 

[Frankfooter]

The article you shared said this:

Both studies searched the Web of Science database – an independent worldwide repository of scientific paper citations – using the keywords “global climate change” and “global warming”. However, the recent study added “climate change” to the other two keyword searches, because the authors found that most climate-contrarian papers would not have been returned with only the two original terms.


The link in the first paragraph essentially said the same thing:

2. Method
Previous attempts to quantify the consensus on climate change have employed many different methodologies, varying from expert elicitation to examination of abstracts returned by a keyword search. We base our methodology on C13 with some important refinements. We searched the Web of Science for English language 'articles' added between the dates of 2012 and November 2020 with the keywords 'climate change', 'global climate change' and 'global warming'.

Do you even read the bs you post?

And why do you have a problem with this?
Even science deniers use the words 'climate change' and 'global warming'.

 

[JohnLarue]

99.9% of climatologists back the IPCC reports, which summarizes the findings.
Scientists get funded for proposals to study areas of interest, not on findings.
How do you get 100 countries to all fund research and have it all come out with similar findings?

Your conspiracy theory makes zero sense.

there is never 99.9% agreement on anything
especially such a controversial subject with such a definitive conclusion
it only takes two out a thousand to say , ''hold on

Your conspiracy theory bullshit math makes zero sense.

 

[Skoob]

And why do you have a problem with this?
Even science deniers use the words 'climate change' and 'global warming'.

Because you tried to peddle misleading information by stating that 99.9% of scientists believe the same thing and didn't realize that this sampling was just based on this for-profit website.
I'll give you credit for trying...you're just not good at it and it makes you untrustworthy.

 

[Frankfooter]

there is never 99.9% agreement on anything
especially such a controversial subject with such a definative conclusion
it only takes one out a thousand to say , ''hold on

Your conspiracy theory bullshit math makes zero sense.

That's because the science is clear and the evidence massive, larue.
The planet is warming, CO2 levels rising and all the evidence posts to the IPCC projections and science to be correct.

What have you got?
The opinions of those 0.01% who think otherwise yet can't explain what is happening and what is going to happen next?

 

[Frankfooter]

Because you tried to peddle misleading information by stating that 99.9% of scientists believe the same thing and didn't realize that this sampling was just based on this for-profit website.
I'll give you credit for trying...you're just not good at it and it makes you untrustworthy.

The information came from a study that sampled thousands of papers, skoob.
Not from the conversation.

How can you get everything wrong so consistently?

 

[JohnLarue]

Because you tried to peddle misleading information by stating that 99.9% of scientists believe the same thing and didn't realize that this sampling was just based on this for-profit website.
I'll give you credit for trying...you're just not good at it and it makes you untrustworthy.

every post he makes just reinforces skepticism of the climate change propaganda

this is one dim bulb trying to mislead others and instead making himself into a laughing stock

 

[bver_hunter]

To The Climate Change Deniers.............If this is not due to the Impact from Climate Change, then what is!!

Brazil floods: 'We've never experienced anything like it'

People in southern Brazil have described the unprecedented devastation wreaked by flooding and overflowing rivers which have left swathes of the area under water.
The floods are the worst natural calamity ever to hit the state of Rio Grande do Sul, officials say.
At least 95 people have died and more than 130 are still missing.
An estimated 1.4 million people have been affected by the floods and aid workers are struggling to provide them with drinking water.

Days of torrential rain caused rivers to overflow and have submerged entire towns.
The capital of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, is among those affected.
The city of 1.3 million inhabitants has been almost totally cut off by the floods.
An estimated 80% of its population do not have access to running water after five of the city's six water treatment plants ceased working.
Suzan, a resident of Porto Alegre, said that people in the city had "never experienced anything like it".
"There are thousands of people who lost their houses. Now we don't have water anywhere," she said in a voice message she sent to the BBC.
"My mother-in-law is 90 years old and she had to be carried by the rescuers. It's unbelievable what is going on here," she added.
The city's mayor has rationed drinking water and city officials are distributing water in tanker trucks.
The work of aid and rescue teams has been hampered by criminal gangs, which have been stealing their boats.
"Jet skis and houses were looted. This is deplorable and must be denounced," a presidential spokesman said.
The city authorities have called for anyone who owns "any kind of boat" to put it at the disposal of emergency teams as thousands of residents still need to be rescued from neighbourhoods cut off by the water.

IMAGE SOURCE, GETTY
One resident, Alexander Ramos, told AFP news agency that he had been forced to leave his home because "everything had been washed away by the flood".
"We tried to wait as long as we could, but there was no chance, the army came and rescued us, as well as our dogs."
Some families are leaving the city on foot. "We've been without food for three days," one man told Reuters news agency.
"I'm with people I don't even know, I don't know where my family is," he added.
The latest estimates suggest 155,000 people have been left homeless.
The governor of the region has warned that torrential rainfall is due to resume this week.

Brazil floods: 'We've never experienced anything like it'

Residents of the Brazilian city of Porto Alegre describe the devastation caused by recent floods.

www.bbc.co.uk

Remember that Brazil previously had the biggest far right Climate Change Denier in what he so called "accomplished":

Deforestation of Brazil’s Amazon Has Reached a Record High. What’s Being Done?

Deforestation of Brazil’s Amazon Has Reached a Record High. What’s Being Done?

Scientists say the rain forest is approaching a critical tipping point at which the damage is irreversible.

www.cfr.org

 

[JohnLarue]

That's because the science is clear and the evidence massive, larue.
The planet is warming, CO2 levels rising and all the evidence posts to the IPCC projections and science to be correct.

What have you got?
The opinions of those 0.01% who think otherwise yet can't explain what is happening and what is going to happen next?

what have I got ?
1. scientific understanding you will never even remotely process
2. the failed results of your psudeo science


the climate models are a mess
your climate change propaganda is falling apart

 

[bver_hunter]

Climate Scientist Defeats Deniers, Hopes to Empower Others to Speak Out on Global Crisis in Media

 

[Frankfooter]

what have I got ?
1. scientific understanding you will never even remotely process
2. the failed results of your psudeo science

You have the utter confidence of the Dunning Kruger hero.

View attachment 323850

How stupid do you have to be to keep pushing this bait and switch chart?
All it shows is that you are unable to learn, unable to understand and unable to debate the issues.

 

[bver_hunter]

 

[Frankfooter]

To The Climate Change Deniers.............If this is not due to the Impact from Climate Change, then what is!!

Brazil floods: 'We've never experienced anything like it'

People in southern Brazil have described the unprecedented devastation wreaked by flooding and overflowing rivers which have left swathes of the area under water.
The floods are the worst natural calamity ever to hit the state of Rio Grande do Sul, officials say.
At least 95 people have died and more than 130 are still missing.
An estimated 1.4 million people have been affected by the floods and aid workers are struggling to provide them with drinking water.

Days of torrential rain caused rivers to overflow and have submerged entire towns.
The capital of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, is among those affected.
The city of 1.3 million inhabitants has been almost totally cut off by the floods.
An estimated 80% of its population do not have access to running water after five of the city's six water treatment plants ceased working.
Suzan, a resident of Porto Alegre, said that people in the city had "never experienced anything like it".
"There are thousands of people who lost their houses. Now we don't have water anywhere," she said in a voice message she sent to the BBC.
"My mother-in-law is 90 years old and she had to be carried by the rescuers. It's unbelievable what is going on here," she added.
The city's mayor has rationed drinking water and city officials are distributing water in tanker trucks.
The work of aid and rescue teams has been hampered by criminal gangs, which have been stealing their boats.
"Jet skis and houses were looted. This is deplorable and must be denounced," a presidential spokesman said.
The city authorities have called for anyone who owns "any kind of boat" to put it at the disposal of emergency teams as thousands of residents still need to be rescued from neighbourhoods cut off by the water.

IMAGE SOURCE, GETTY
One resident, Alexander Ramos, told AFP news agency that he had been forced to leave his home because "everything had been washed away by the flood".
"We tried to wait as long as we could, but there was no chance, the army came and rescued us, as well as our dogs."
Some families are leaving the city on foot. "We've been without food for three days," one man told Reuters news agency.
"I'm with people I don't even know, I don't know where my family is," he added.
The latest estimates suggest 155,000 people have been left homeless.
The governor of the region has warned that torrential rainfall is due to resume this week.

Brazil floods: 'We've never experienced anything like it'

Residents of the Brazilian city of Porto Alegre describe the devastation caused by recent floods.

www.bbc.co.uk

Remember that Brazil previously had the biggest far right Climate Change Denier in what he so called "accomplished":

Deforestation of Brazil’s Amazon Has Reached a Record High. What’s Being Done?

Deforestation of Brazil’s Amazon Has Reached a Record High. What’s Being Done?

Scientists say the rain forest is approaching a critical tipping point at which the damage is irreversible.

www.cfr.org

This flood is massive, how do you get people out of there or rebuild?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1788179334198345884

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785876617681617233

 

[JohnLarue]

You have the utter confidence of the Dunning Kruger hero.



How stupid do you have to be to keep pushing this bait and switch chart?
All it shows is that you are unable to learn, unable to understand and unable to debate the issues.

too funny
all of the IPCC estimates come from failed computer models

failed computer models which

1. can't replicate the past -a bare minimum for any predictive model
2. do not agree with each other - settled science you say ? not even close
3. do not agree with actual experimental data - the satellite data is verified by independent weather balloon data sets

this spaghetti mess is not science
it is the result of trying to force a proof of a predetermined conclusion & failing miserably

why would you call the results from "climate scientists'' models a "bait and switch'' ?

this is the output of the so called "settled science' vs the experimental observations in the troposphere
the troposphere, where the GHG theory predicts the catastrophic warming should take place, but has not taken place
this has been explained to you multiple times

there is no bait, there is no switch, just 73 plots of computer nonsense compared against real world experimental observations (satellite and weather balloon data )
the climate models are flawed

How stupid do you have to be to keep pushing this bait and switch chart?

the real question is "How stupid do you have to be to keep trying to fake scientific understanding" ?
it is painfully obvious that you have no scientific training or scientific understanding

 

[K Douglas]

Well cancel the IPCC, kirk has a theory!

Google IPCC and heat island and see if the IPCC has considered your idea already.
Then report.

The only time the planet has warmed faster was either by super volcano or asteroid.

Hogwash. Look up the Younger Dryas period. 4°C rise in temperature in less than 50 years .The IPCC is a corrupt entity. We're living in the most stable climate in the past 2.5 million years. Enough of this nonsense already.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

For the life of me I don't understand why you guys don't have this clown on ignore

 

[Frankfooter]

why would you call the results from "climate scientists'' models a "bait and switch'' ?

it is painfully obvious that you have no scientific training or scientific understanding

Wow, you still can't understand why your chart is bait and switch.
Start with reading the wiki definition of troposphere, where the satellite measures temperature.

Troposphere - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Next, compare that with global surface temperatures.

Global surface temperature - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Then see if you can puzzle out why using projections of measurements of the temperature on the surface of the planet shouldn't be compared with measurements of the temperature in the troposphere.

Then take a look at your last sentence and explain how someone who claims to know or have scientific training could make such a basic error repeatedly, and even after being told countless times.

 

[Frankfooter]

Hogwash. Look up the Younger Dryas period. 4°C rise in temperature in less than 50 years .The IPCC is a corrupt entity. We're living in the most stable climate in the past 2.5 million years. Enough of this nonsense already.

Do you know what the major theory for that change in temperature is?
A shutdown of the AMOC.

AMOC shutdown is one of the 7 major tipping points we have been warmed are getting incredibly close.

Atlantic current shutdown is a real danger, suggests simulation

The most detailed computer model run so far shows that melting ice sheets could cause the collapse of the major ocean current that warms Europe, but it's still unclear how likely this is to happen

www.newscientist.com

Warning of a forthcoming collapse of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation