Ah, so now you realize that the graph you posted shows you are full of crap and so omit it from your posts. That is typical conspiracy theorist tactics; have your point destroyed and then move on ignoring it.
President Is Dead Wrong About Climate Change: Nobel Prize Winning Scientist
- Thread starter Big Sleazy
- Start date
Except the actual observed data matches the graph's projections so all we're examining is your Luddite view on science.
You're as nutty as Groggy. He criticizes me for not posting more up-to-date graphs. When I show him that he is wrong and re-post the more up-to-date graphs, you accuse me of trying to "move on."
All of the graphs confirm that the IPCC's predictions have been spectacularly wrong.
I see. So let's revisit the question I posted this morning.
According to you, "the models" correctly predicted that huge increases in man-made CO2 emissions wouldn't have any statistically significant impact on the Earth's temperature.
If that's what you believe the models are predicting, what are you worrying about?
I don't have any issue with sensible measures to reduce the burning of fossil fuels, etc. However, the champions of AGW are usually the same ones who advocate for the least sensible measures, such as costly and useless renewable energy schemes.
Furthermore, I don't believe the ends justify the means.
Corrupting "science" by creating dubious scares about the future of the planet should be rejected if the predictions aren't supported by evidence. I don't care about the motivations behind the scares.
The subject is,...rising oceans.
Graph #1 illustrates that the ocean levels have been rising since 1880,...nobody is debating that,...makes total sense,...the earth is, and has been getting warmer since the last ice age.
Your statement that oceans are rising at a higher rate,...not according to your graph,...oceans have risen at a rate comparable to the current rate numerous times in the past.
But for some reason we are lead to believe that looking at the current a very short period time,...magically that is some how different.
The graph covers 130 years,...and we are supposed to just look at the CURRENT 5,...this is ridiculous.
IF we were look back at the last 5 years 30 years from now,...then we can talk,...until then,...this is purely conjecture.
FAST
Bullshit. You simply removed the graph that exposed your fraud. Sad conspiracy theorist type behaviour.
Then you top it off with misrepresentations of what the facts show and the facts show that the observed data meets the main projections. That means that the actual observations support the models based on AGW. I know you don't like it when science actually shows something you don't like and I'm not worried since the science won't be ignored just because a few ignorant types like you refuse to accept reality.
You're as nutty as Groggy.
Let's review.
1) The overwhelming majority of models predicted that increases in man-made CO2 emissions would lead to significant increases in the Earth's temperature.
2) There have been huge increases in man-made CO2 emissions since the late 1990s.
3) The observed data show the Earth's temperature has been stable for at least 15 years.
4) Basketcase says the observed data support the projections.
Basketcase's conclusion puts the "idiot" in idiotic. And, other than ranting, he didn't really answer my question.
Let's try again. If you genuinely believe "the models" are projecting that increases in man-made CO2 emissions won't affect the Earth's temperature, what are you worrying about?
Discussion aside, it's amusing that the worst insult we can utter is comparisons to groggy.
Actually the graph you provided as 'proof' shows projections that are matched by actual observations.
The ultimate insult
FAST
I would have though one would get banned for the insult, of comparing some one to FOOTER/GROGGY.
FAST
As the IPCC demonstrated when it made its spectacularly wrong predictions, the overwhelming majority of projections were well in excess of that level.
In hindsight, I do wonder if the mods will start banning members who insult others in such a horrible manner.
Funny but the observed data fits well within the projections you provided. That is only 'spectacularly wrong' in conspiracy world.
And they have.
Latest reports say 4 of 5 indicators have at us hitting 1ºC global anomaly.
That's against all 'natural sources' of climate change, which all at present would have a cooling effect, so in effect we've already raised the globes temperature halfway to the most we think it can take, without massive changes.
Present global anomaly is 0.83ºC.
Yup, and 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have happened since 2000.
Theres a pattern there that smarter people can figure out, good luck with that.
Total bullshit.
Complete and total bullshit.
2014 was a record year.
2015 will probably break that record.
And he's right, as proven by the charts you've posted, even when you've used the wrong charts.
Its too bad you just can't plot numbers on a chart.
Not quite. A FEW influential scientists are part of an intellectual fraud. That better?
Now you are claiming that a few scientists have hoodwinked pretty much every single legit scientist in the states and through the world?
Some crazy conspiracy theory so that these few scientists can reap the massive awards of thousands, and sometimes tens of thousands, of dollars for research money?
Very lame.
Even Rolling Stone knows what's going on.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...e-nightmares-are-already-here-20150805?page=2
The IPCC predictions were conservative, they are the safe predictions.
Problem is we are now surpassing those predictions, with ocean levels and temperatures that will lead us into extreme climate change faster then they predicted.
It certainly sounds ridiculous that a FEW scientists, even influential ones, can make the rest of the scientific community do as they wish.
There you have it folks,...our very own BOY WONDER climatologist has declared that eliminating forests has no effect on CO2 and O2 content in the air,...and therefor does NOT contribute to "global warming".
AND in fact,...the actual result of deforestation,...is cooling of the earths temp.
So shit,...we have been doing it all wrong,...instead of burning oil,...we should be burning trees,...its a win win,...we get fuel,...and the earth gets cooler,...!!!
Oh,... but that won't work,...because then all the unemployables would be out of work,...!!!
Plus,...one can see the result of oxygen starvation at an early age,...are very own BOY WONDER climatologist ,...and that result ain't good.
Another gem,...Even IF that was true,...that statement is absolutely useless,...but expected,...but I don't expect BOY WONDER climatologist to understand why.
FAST
Here you go.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/02/14-15-hottest-years-record-2000-un-global-warming
Are you now accusing NASA, NOAA, AAAS and now the UN and Guardian of all lying?
Or of being hoodwinked by a handful of scientists tricking the world out to make thousands of dollars from those incredibly lucrative research grants?
You should apologize and admit you are wrong.
They haven't. Most scientists don't subscribe to their beliefs. The influence they get is mostly through the IPCC and other gov't agencies of individual nations. There is TONS of money backing them. Michael Mann for instance was paid millions for the fraudulent hockey stick graph. Phil Jones, Gavin Schmidt, James Hanson they're multi millionaires. The peer review process - total bogus.
Who on earth would pay Michael Mann millions to draw a phoney graph? I mean, wouldn't other scientists see that bullshit? What do you mean that most scientists don't subscribe to their beliefs? Most scientists believe in AGW I thought.
