I've got some more proof to describe how foolish you truly are for being a sheep to AGW morons. With this proof comes info on even more actual scientists who deny AGW outright. Read them and weep.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstrea m_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
Though I hate to use Wikipedia, in this particular case, it lists various real scientists who have denied AGW out right as well as offers references. The dozens of scientists mentioned here should convince even the dumbest of fools. Though, for some reason, I doubt it will convince you. You'd rather be in bed with other people you consider to be true scientists even though they were proven wrong time and time again.
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&C ontentRecord_id=2674E64F-802A-23AD-490B-BD9FAF4DCDB7
This mentions that 700 actual scientists disagree with your so-called "scientists."
http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php
This site is all about the Global Warming Hoax
Now, I shall address some more of your sheer idiocy on this specific board. Here goes.
Let's start with this ridiculous statement from you, shall we.
Show me the scientific publications of this climate scientist please.
Her name is Jane Francis. She is an actual climate scientist who has actually studied the climate. That is ALL any thinking individual needs to know.
Another ridiculous statement from you is this.
You made a lame attempt by mentioning the good ol' Medieval Warm Period, the common argument of AGW-denialist beginners.
One, that wasn't a lame attempt at all. That disproves AGW outright. History is proof right there.
Then there's this ridiculous statement.
I don't care for AL Gore. He is a politician, not a scientist.
Of course, Al Gore's not a scientist because actual scientists have proven his baseless claims of AGW wrong time and time again. That's what makes your ilk utterly stupid. Scientists have proven you wrong time and time again, yet you still follow what Al Gore says like the idiot puppy dog you are.
You follow that up with this statement.
Sure. That's because CO2 is not the only driver of the climate. The causes of historical climate changes are well known and understood, in the same way we know that this global warming is caused by CO2.
Obviously the causes of climate changes are not well known and understood by you. The historical charts prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that CO2 is NOT a driver in Global Climate change. They also prove that Global Climate change is a driver of CO2. History proves it, for crying out loud.
Then, of course, there's this ridiculously stupid statement.
There only was an Ice Age scare in the 1970s, and it only was a media hype. Not a single climate scientist seriously considered a new Ice Age at the time. And I already mentioned the cause of the short term cooling of that time, which was aerosol albedo.
One, the scare started as early as the 50's. Two, it was NOT merely just media hype as you fallaciously claim. Historical records prove it wasn't. Three, nearly EVERY single climate scientist at the time seriously considered a new Ice Age. Historical records prove this, as well. Forth, the cause was NOT aerosol albedo as you ignorantly claim. The cause for the cooling then is the same cause for the warming we are experiencing right now, and that is not a man-made cause by the way.
Your lack of logic clearly shows in your next statement.
There are people which were killed by car accidents. This trend COMPLETELY disproves the theory that people can be killed by guns, because it proves that the number of killed people doesn't always correlate with number of armed attacks.
Those killed by guns and those killed by car accidents are not related whatsoever. That was a very pathetic attack on my logic because my comparisons actually work; whereas, your's did NOT. The trends I've provided prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that Global Climate doesn't always rise with a rise in CO2.
Now for your last statement in that particular post.
Sunspot variation is a cyclic event. Natural cycles require a forcing, and no known forcing exists that would explain the observed warming, except for CO2 and other greenhouse gases.
Actually, forcing does exist that does explain quite perfectly the observed warming. It is called sunspot activity. Seriously, are you really that dim. Charts prove that the current warming cycle we are experiencing now correlate nearly perfectly with sun spot activity now. At the same time, charts also prove that there is NO correlation whatsoever between the warming we are experiencing now and CO2 levels. Scientific and historic charts prove these undeniable facts.
Now, I shall address another of your ludicrous posts.
In your first statement of the post, you stated
Lindzen's statements only reflect his personal opinion and are irrelevant. Scientists do research and publish their results.
Scientists, which Lindzen is one of, do research, which Lindzen has done, and publish their results, which Lindzen has also done. That is the ONLY thing you got right so far. Go back and check the link. Good luck finding the rebuttals because you can't really rebut the factual truth which has been proven time and time again by actual scientists doing actual research into the climate.
Now for this statement.
I'm not part of a camp, and I didn't make any assumptions. I merely present the results of proper scientific research, along with the sources.
Yeah, right. I hope you realize you really made yourself look really stupid there because so far, you haven't presented the results of proper scientific research, along with their sources, at all. I have. The ONLY thing you've provided are papers from so-called "scientists" who have been disproven time and time again by actual scientists who have done proper scientific research and offered their own actual scientific sources. I've provided actual scientists here who have done actual science. THE ONLY THINGS YOU'VE PROVIDED ARE PAPERS FROM PEOPLE YOU BELIEVE ARE SCIENTISTS BUT COULDN'T ACTUALLY BE SCIENTISTS BECAUSE THEIR FINDINGS FLY IN THE FACE OF ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. Come back when you get actual scientists who have done actual scientific research, please, because you proved ONLY your own idiocy there.
Finally, your final statement here.
You mentioned two or three points from the common repertoire of AGW denialist beginners, which I have already addressed.
Do you actually think, that you are the first wannabe-skeptic I'm talking to? Or the most clever one?
I've mentioned more than 2 or 3 points. I've provided 8 links and three actual scientists, now 11 links and dozens more actual scientists, who completely disagree with AGW. I may not be the first wannabe-skeptic, as you claim, or even the most clever one. However, it is clear from your complete and utter denial of the established science that someone doesn't have to be that clever to prove you wrong. I proved you wrong yet again. Though, knowing how foolish you are, you will probably deny the facts I've provided in this post, as well. My advice for you, kid, is to go back to school and learn what really causes climate change. I keep proving you wrong; yet, you keep making the same flat out fallacious claims that have been proven wrong time and time again. You really need to come back after actually looking at the science behind climate change, you know, because it is obviously clear from your utter stupidity that you do NOT understand the science whatsoever.
Oh, and one more thing before I go because this will likely be the last post I ever make to you since it looks like you will ALWAYS be in denial of the scientific, historic, and archaeologic facts that prove AGW to be nothing but a crock. I'd rather not waste my time with a moron who clearly loves to deny what has been proven BOTH historically AND scientifically time and time again.
It is an undeniable FACT that AGW is a crock. It is an undeniable FACT that AGW is a crock because BOTH history AND science prove it to be an undeniable FACT that AGW is a crock. ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE, who actually believes in AGW is either stupid, a lunatic, or just plain blind to what the scientific facts actually show. Now, you can live in your AGW, which has been disproven by actual scientists, all you want. I will live in reality, where actual science from actual scientists has proven the utter idiocy of those like you who have fallen for the AGW myth of idiotic "green scientists" who really have NO clue whatsoever of what they're talking about. Good bye and good riddance. Have fun living in a world that clearly goes against what science has already established decades ago. You have only shown your own idiocy here, thank you very much. I didn't even have to try that hard. I'm sure most intelligent people can see through your utter stupidity with ease. All they need to do is look at the undeniable scientific facts and scientific data that disprove AGW outright and prove just how fallacious some of your baseless claims actually are. For instance, your claim that not many climate scientists actually took the Ice Age scare of the 70's seriously. A quick Google search will disprove your claim there, you know. A quick Google search will make clear that nearly ALL so-called climate "scientists" of the time took the Ice Age scare seriously. A quick Google search will prove just how fallacious your lie is there. Oh, the wonders of the internet. It makes it easy to prove idiots like you wrong. Next time, don't come back unless you can actually say something that is at least somewhat intelligent. Otherwise, I will just ignore you. By the way, the so-called papers from your "scientists" don't mean squat when your "scientists" have been proven wrong time and time again by actual scientists who have actually done some real research on the climate and have published some actual scientific papers of their own disproving AGW. I mean, when the actual science doesn't even back up your so-called "scientists" you'd think you would learn. I guess you are clear proof that an idiot is born every day. Keep going against science all you want. I will stick with it, moron.
ALL HAIL THE HIGH QUEEN!!!!!
reply
share
Rangely8723
13 years ago
The dozens of scientists mentioned here should convince even the dumbest of fools.
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) alone already has over 55,000 members, with about 7,200 experts for atmospheric sciences, 6,000 hydrologists and 6,800 specialists for oceanic sciences. The American Meteorological Society claims over 14,000 members. Multiplicate the numbers with 20 and you will get the approximate number of experts worldwide. And you speak of dozens, LOL.
Her name is Jane Francis
Name the relevant publications please.
And again: Please stop with all the drivel. I don't read all your mental waste, and you only make a fool out of yourself with this ridiculous nonsense.
« Et moi, je lui ferai porter la sienne comme Saint Denis »
reply
share
cahnd2b
13 years ago
Her name is Jane Francis. She is an actual climate scientist who has actually studied the climate. That is ALL any thinking individual needs to know.
well there's a very bizarre statement from a supposed 'skeptic'. It would seem you don't apply the same level of skepticism to those you already agree with. It would seem that your form of 'skepticism' is exclusively reserved for those you have already decided you don't agree with.
The ONLY thing you've provided are papers from so-called "scientists" who have been disproven time and time again by actual scientists who have done proper scientific research and offered their own actual scientific sources. I've provided actual scientists here who have done actual science. THE ONLY THINGS YOU'VE PROVIDED ARE PAPERS FROM PEOPLE YOU BELIEVE ARE SCIENTISTS BUT COULDN'T ACTUALLY BE SCIENTISTS BECAUSE THEIR FINDINGS FLY IN THE FACE OF ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.
You can state it, you can shout it, you can scream it.
But that doesn't make it true.
Every major scientific organisation accepts the reality that climate change is being driven by human activity.
Here is a small sampling:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
National Research Council
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
American Meteorological Society
American Institute of Physics
European Science Foundation
European Federation of Geologists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Geological Society of America
American Medical Association
World Health Organization
American Astronomical Society
American Statistical Association
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute – Ocean and Climate Change Institute
NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
you will find there are many more listed in IPPC reports and elsewhere.
Here you will find a list of organisations that claim to be skeptical of findings of anthropogenic climate change:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warmin g_contrarians/global-warming-skeptic.html
No scientific body of national or international standing rejects the position that humans are contributing to climate change.
reply
share
One_Man_Army
13 years ago
Why should I apply the same level of skepticism to those I already agree with? Jane Francis is an actual climate scientist who has actually studied the climate, after all, and she emphatically states that AGW is a crock.
Sure, stating it, shouting it, and screaming it doesn't make it true. However, since EVERYTHING from those so-called "scientists" actually DOES fly in the face of the actual scientific research, it IS, in fact, true.
Those scientific organizations you speak of only accept it because it is popular to do so. That is the ONLY reason President Bush accepted it, as well. However, the actual scientific research simply does NOT, nor has it ever, supported AGW. Actual scientists who have actually studied Global Warming have said so for decades. What is popular is not always right, you know.
By the way, I love how you link to a site that explains NOTHING but one conspiracy after another while I linked to several sites with actual scientific facts. Please. You link to a site referring to ExxonMobile's so-called disinformation tactics. Give me a break.
It is an absolute FACT that there is absolutely NO real scientific evidence supporting AGW. ALL of the actual scientific evidence proves that the Global Warming we are experiencing now comes much more from natural sources. For crying out loud, people contribute to less than 4% of the entire planet's greenhouse gases. The entire human race is responsible for less than 4% of all greenhouse gas output, for crying out loud, and ONLY a fraction of that, even, is CO2. There is absolutely NO way that small contribution would raise the temperature at all. The temperature went up only a fraction of a degree in the past decade, so there is absolutely NO real warming going on. The temperature went up ONLY about 1.5 degrees in the past 100 years, so, again, there is NO real warming going on. These are undeniable facts that prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that AGW is a crock. ANYONE who believes in AGW is an idiot who hasn't actually looked at the actual scientific facts.
You may not like it, but it is what it is. AGW IS a crock. EVERY bit of actual scientific evidence proves it to be NOTHING but a crock. You can keep following your crackpot "scientists" all you want. I, on the other hand, will believe the actual scientists who have actually studied the climate and know better what the truth is. I mean, your "scientists" are saying that just a couple degree rise in global temperatures will lead to a 20 foot rise in ocean levels, for crying out loud. Talk about idiocy of the highest level. Sorry. The world doesn't work like that. Global Warming is happening. I'm not denying that. However, it is NOT because of humans. To say humans are the cause is simply idiotic and is supported by NOTHING but conjecture. You do realize that the global temperature was much higher about 1,000 years ago, don't you? That is an undeniable fact that disproves AGW on the outset. We have yet to see the global temperatures the planet saw about 1,000 years ago. Once we start to see those temperatures again, I can guarantee you it won't be long before we see the type of Global Cooling we saw a few hundred years ago before we entered the current warming trend we are in. Most climate scientists actually believe that we are in a minor cooling trend right now. It is NOTHING but a natural warming and cooling cycle of this planet. Most actual scientists have said so time and time again and have proven your so-called "scientists" wrong time and time again. You will see, probably within the next 100 years if you live that long, the popularity of the idiotic AGW movement die down and all those so-called scientific organizations that currently espouse AGW will move their support over to the more traditional scientific views they once held that are backed up by real science.
I follow real, true science here, not science twisted for whatever political or ulterior motives your so-called "scientists" choose to warp science into. It might do you well to quit being a stupid sheep to them and start looking into the actual scientific facts. Or are you just the type of guy who wants to follow the popular crowd just because it seems cool. News flash for you, but it isn't really all that cool when you follow a lie, such as the massive AGW lie. And it is, of course, a lie proven by the actual scientific evidence. I mean, the actual scientific evidence proves beyond any doubt that AGW is NOTHING but a myth, after all. To say otherwise would be idiotic and would fly in the face of all the scientific evidence.
One more thing. Did you actually check out the site you linked to? It is all to obvious what its political agenda really is. Are you seriously so blind you can't see through it? Are you seriously that deep in bed with the idiot AGW followers? Come on. Get your head out of your rear end and look at the actual scientific facts. I mean, those at the site make this particular statement. "Global warming deniers downplay and distort the evidence of climate change." That is NOTHING but a load of bull. On the contrary, it is the AGW folks who distort the evidence of climate change. That fact has been proven time and time again by actual scientists. Heck, Rangely8723 even proves that fact with his own distortions of the evidence. He is way off with some of his so-called "facts" that it's simply ridiculous. Rangely claims that the warming the Vikings experienced wasn't global. However, it WAS a Global Warming event. This is an undeniable fact. Global historic charts prove it. Talk about distorting the evidence. Idiot AGW followers have distorted much more evidence than AGW deniers could ever dream of. Do you really like following idiots who warp science for their own ulterior motives, or are you really just a stupid sheep following the AGW movement only because it is popular to do so? News flash, doing so doesn't make AGW true. Facts are what would make AGW true, and since NO actual scientific fact actually supports AGW, it could NOT possibly be true.
ALL HAIL THE HIGH QUEEN!!!!!
reply
share
cahnd2b
13 years ago
Why should I apply the same level of skepticism to those I already agree with? Jane Francis is an actual climate scientist who has actually studied the climate, after all, and she emphatically states that AGW is a crock.
A true skeptic would want to know a bit more about a person's credentials and where they are coming from. You say
'she is an actual climate scientist and that is all any thinking person needs to know'. So obviously all the published working scientists and major organisations that disagree with you are
'idiots', and
'not actual scientists', and everyone who trusts the scientific process and accepts the overwhelming consensus that has been arrived at are
'stupid sheep'.
Anyhow, working in good faith, I googled Jane Francis and found a list of her publications. They mostly cover paleo-climate. I may have missed it, but I didn't see anything relating to current climate change.
Show me where she disputes the mainstream scientific position on climate change.
I'm just curious.
reply
share
One_Man_Army
13 years ago
Uhm, climate is climate. The processes of the climate have NEVER changed. The climate change that happened then and the climate change that is happening now are the same EXACT forms of climate change. She has come to that conclusion and has stated that emphatically time and time again. Just check out one of the first 4 links I've provided. I've quoted what she stated word for word in one of my earlier posts to the AGW moron who calls himself rangely, for crying out loud. She stated that the climate change we are experiencing right now is nothing but a part of our planet's icehouse climate. To even combat climate change is simply farcical. Those were some of her words, by the way. This means, it would be foolish to even attempt such a climate change reversal. There's NO point. The planet will reverse the climate change itself in its own time. Most actual climate scientists have come to that same conclusion. The fact that you think the current climate change is different than previous climate changes is what makes you AGW nutcases the nutcases you are. Why should today's climate change be ANY different than previous climate changes? The answer is simple. They will NOT be different in the slightest. According to EVERY SINGLE scientific fact, climate change today will be NO different than climate changes 1,000 years ago, 100,000 years ago, or even 1,000,000 years ago.
Anyway, you make a flat out bogus claim from AGW followers when you stated, "Everyone who trusts the scientific process and accepts the overwhelming consensus that has been arrived at are 'stupid sheep'." No. The ones who trust the scientific process, like me, are the ones who do NOT accept the overwhelming consensus that has been arrived at, so are NOT stupid sheep. You see, ONLY idiots would be led to AGW if they actually followed the scientific process. The scientific process is what proves EVERY SINGLE one of your so-called "scientists" wrong, after all.
According to the scientific process EVERY SINGLE period of Global Warming MUST, and will, be followed by a period of Global Cooling. That is NO different now. The Global Warming we are experiencing now is only temporary. Eventually, it will become Global Cooling. That is a scientific FACT proven by the scientific process. It is you AGW nutcases that are ignoring the scientific processes, not AGW deniers.
Oh, and by the way, there really aren't very many published working scientists who actually agree with AGW. Most published working scientists actually believe quite the opposite. I've listed quite a few published working scientists in one of the links I've provided who have emphatically stated AGW is NOTHING but a crock. Francis is but one of them. The few published working "scientists" who do agree with AGW have been called out by the actual scientists who have continuously proven them wrong time and time again through actual research. It is AGW nutcases who keep the stupid AGW movement alive, not the cold, hard scientific facts from actual scientists who have actually done research in the field.
Anyway, believe what you want. I choose to believe the truth backed up by actual scientific facts, as do thousands of actual scientists who have actually done proper research. AGW, simply put, is NOT backed up by a single bit of actual scientific evidence, so how anyone actually believes it is beyond ridiculous. I guess it proves that idiots will believe just about anything they're told as long as it is popular to believe it.
ALL HAIL THE HIGH QUEEN!!!!!
reply
share
One_Man_Army
13 years ago
Just take a look at these articles. They explain quite clearly what actual scientists have been saying for years.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3312921/The-deceit-behind-g lobal-warming.html
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2009/04/137_43432.html
The first article even brings up Michael Mann's bogus hockey stick chart. Of course, that bogus chart has been made a sham by actual scientists. The problem here is that not only was the chart shown to be complete bogus, but your so-called "scientists" still use the chart today to spread their AGW lies. You remember how I mentioned that the site you linked to claimed how AGW deniers are the ones who distort the truth. How about AGW followers distorting the truth by still using a bogus hockey stick chart. Using the proper scientific process would produce a chart not so bogus, you know. Heck, Mann's hockey stick blatantly ignored some Global Warming trends in our planet's history, like the fact that the global temperatures were much higher in the medieval period than they are today and the slight Global Cooling that took place between the 1950s and 1970s. Or how about the fact that throughout history it has been shown by actual scientists that a rise in global temperatures comes BEFORE, not after, a rise in global CO2 levels. Scientific facts prove this. It is unbelievable how you blatantly deny these very clear scientific facts and still believe in the idiotic AGW myth. AGW is complete bogus. EVERY REAL scientist has called it bogus for a reason, you know. It is NOTHING but a sham. REAL scientists have called it for what it is. The ONLY "scientists" who agree with AGW are NOT really scientists at all because AGW flies in the face of established scientific facts which have been established scientific facts for decades, heck, even centuries. To go against established scientific facts would be anti-scientific, you know.Rhetorical question for you. Do you actually believe in Mann's hockey stick? If you do believe it, then I don't really know what to tell you. I mean, the graph was proven back in 2003 to be a bogus deception of the AGW movement, yet those in the movement still espouse the graph as scientifically accurate. And you wonder why some people don't take you seriously.
ALL HAIL THE HIGH QUEEN!!!!!
reply
share
Rangely8723
13 years ago
The first article even brings up Michael Mann's bogus hockey stick chart. Of course, that bogus chart has been made a sham by actual scientists.
Bullshít.
The original paper: "Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations", Mann / Bradley, 1999.
was never rebutted. Here is a critique of it:
- "Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance" McIntyre / McKitrick, 2004.
(Heck, I even have to present the skeptic stuff for you, since you are too dumb to do it yourself)
But numerous research results, including most recent data actually confirm Mann's conclusions:
- "Robustness of the Mann, Bradley, Hughes reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures: Examination of criticisms based on the nature and processing of proxy climate evidence", Wahl/Ammann, 2007.
- "Temperature trends over the past five centuries reconstructed from borehole temperatures", Huang et al., 2000.
- "Reconstructing hemispheric-scale climates from multiple stalagmite records", Smith et al., 2006.
- "Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records", Oerlemans, 2005.
And here is the revised and peer-reviewed paper by Mann et al. (2008):
- "Proxy-based reconstructions of hemispheric and global surface temperature variations over the past two millennia"
So all you can do is to parrot the poor attempts to discredit Michael Mann, without even knowing the background, and without even realizing that these attempts completely failed.
« Et moi, je lui ferai porter la sienne comme Saint Denis »
reply
share
Rangely8723
13 years ago
She stated that the climate change we are experiencing right now is nothing but a part of our planet's icehouse climate.
There are numerous peer-reviewed papers based on actual reasearch which contradict her/your assumptions. I will only mention a few ones which refer to most important aspects:
- "Global Climate Changes as Forecast by Goddard Institute for Space Studies Three-Dimsensional Model", Hansen et al. 1988.
- "Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate", Meehl et al., 2004.
- "Attribution of regional-scale temperature changes to anthropogenic
and natural causes", Stott, 2003.
- "Causes of atmospheric temperature change 1960–2000: A combined
attribution analysis", Jones et al., 2003.
- "Contributions of Anthropogenic and Natural Forcing to Recent Tropopause Height Changes", Santer et al., 2003.
- "Global Change in the Upper Atmosphere", Lastovicka et al., 2006.
- "An observationally based energy balance for the Earth since 1950", Murphy et al., 2009.
- "Earth's Global Energy Budget", Trenberth et al., 2009.
I've quoted what she stated word for word in one of my earlier posts to the AGW moron who calls himself rangely, for crying out loud.
So far:
Research data and peer-reviewed publications contributed by One_Man_Army:
0Research data and peer-reviewed publications contributed by Rangely8723:
19Seems that you got your ass handed to you by the "AGW moron".
« Et moi, je lui ferai porter la sienne comme Saint Denis »
reply
share
Rangely8723
13 years ago
Jane Francis is an actual climate scientist who has actually studied the climate, after all, and she emphatically states that AGW is a crock.
Even if she would be the only climate expert on the whole planet - mere statements and opinion are irrelevant. Scientists have to do research and they have to prove their conclusions, and they have to publish it for peer-review and scientific discussion. I've looked up a quite comprehensive list of peer-reviewed publications on topic myself, but couldn't find a paper published by this alleged climate scientist. Can you name a paper?
Those scientific organizations you speak of only accept it because it is popular to do so.
No. They accept it, because research results from thousands of scientists show that AGW is happening, and recent data confirms it.
EVERY bit of actual scientific evidence proves it to be NOTHING but a crock.
You couldn't name a single aspect so far. You aren't even able to present a single scientific paper that would back up your assumptions.
Rangely claims that the warming the Vikings experienced wasn't global.
No, I do NOT CLAIM that. The research results are showing it, and unlike you, I can name actual publications. Here are some peer-reviewed papers and published research data:
- "Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data", Moberg et al., 2005.
- "Global Signatures and Dynamical Origins of the Little Ice Age and
Medieval Climate Anomaly"; Mann et al, 2009.
- "Surface Temperature Reconstructions For The Last 2,000 Years", NAS
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11676&page=R1 - NOAA merged land air and sea surface temperature dataset,
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/gridded/data.noaamergedtemp.htmlRangely8723 even proves that fact with his own distortions of the evidence.
See, I already can provide four references for only one single point you referred to, and clearly disprove your assumptions. On the other hand, all YOU can do is writing huge comments full of drivel and mere assumptions, without presenting the slightest piece of evidence. You can't even name publications from the alleged experts you have mentioned. You are merely laughing stock, a loudmouth and gasbag.
« Et moi, je lui ferai porter la sienne comme Saint Denis »
reply
share
One_Man_Army
13 years ago
Here are a couple more sites for you to check out and learn something about what is REALLY causing the Earth to warm up. It has NOTHING to do with CO2 levels. ALL the actual science proves this.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comm ents/column_the_10_warming_myths/
Now, this one may be a blog, so knowing your idiotic, close minded view on science, you might just ignore it. However, it does explain some cold, hard, scientifically proven and verified facts that disprove your AGW lies on the outset.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3638881/Were-hurting- Britain-not-saving-the-planet.html
This is an article from an Earth scientist who has a PhD in Earth chemistry. He has emphatically stated that any release in man-made CO2 is NOWHERE near enough to raise the global temperatures. In laymen's terms, since you are obviously too ignorant to get it, this means man's release of CO2 is negligible when compared to ALL other sources of CO2. This, too, fits in with the established science considering that science proves that men are responsible for less than 4% of ALL greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere, ONLY a fraction of which is actual CO2.
Another site I found, which I won't provide here because it is clearly way too biased in favor of the skeptics, more so, even, than the first link of this post, makes the statement, "Only morons, cheats and liars still believe in Man-Made Global Warming." That statement, most definitely, is true considering how you guys have done NOTHING but lied about what is causing Global Warming, especially your lie about how most scientists didn't think we were headed to an Ice Age in the 1970's. News flash for you, an overwhelming majority of mainstream "scientists" thought we were headed into an ice age in the 1970's. There were so few papers about global warming in the 1970's and so many papers about the coming Ice Age that it is simply ridiculous you Global Warming morons keep perpetuating the myth that most "scientists" believed in Global Warming over an impending Ice Age during the '70s.
I mean, seriously, you have to be seriously brain dead to actually still believe in the lie that is AGW. Look toward the Sun, please. That is the biggest cause of nearly ALL of the warming we are seeing today. That's right. Almost all of the warming you have seen in the last 100-200 years is a result of the Sun's activities. Actual science done by actual scientists, not idiotic morons who like to call themselves scientists despite flying in the face of actual science, proves this fact entirely. Again, to still believe in AGW, despite ALL of the overwhelming evidence disproving it, you have to be one of the biggest morons on the planet. Though Global Warming exists, Anthropogenic Global Warming does NOT and NEVER will. Anthropogenic Global Warming is COMPLETELY and UTTERLY infeasible and impossible. Anyone with any knowledge in how our planet works would tell you exactly that. ANYONE who spreads the AGW myth is either a moron or a liar, ANYONE, and should be left out of science because science is where they do NOT belong. Science is for actual, quantifiable, verifiable evidence, not the made up lies of an idiot who doesn't understand how this planet works. ALL of the actual scientific data proves, BEYOND ANY DOUBT, that AGW is NOTHING but a crock made up by idiots who have absolutely NO understanding of our planet and how it works. You will see, within your lifetime most likely, just how much of a crock you AGW morons really are. Those who stick with the real science behind the issue, like me, will be shown to be correct once the truth behind the matter comes out, which, in some cases, it already has. Go back to school and actually learn about our environment, please. Seeing as how most schools nowadays have fallen for you AGW myth, however, I don't really see how that's going to help. It only contributes to the dumbing down of society in general. You AGW morons are like the idiots in the film Idiocracy, so dimwitted that you can't even see what the actual scientific facts prove BEYOND ANY DOUBT whatsoever, that AGW is NOTHING but a myth.
ALL HAIL THE HIGH QUEEN!!!!!
reply
share
Rangely8723
13 years ago
ALL the actual science proves this.
No.
All your websites and blogs are irrelevant and worth a shít, same as your moronic rant. Science is not made by personal opinion or propaganda from some websites, it is made by research performed by experts. Research results are published in accredited scientific journals after a peer-review. Only peer-reviewed papers and first-hand data are valid sources of information. Either back your assumptions up with peer-reviewed publications or shut up.
« Et moi, je lui ferai porter la sienne comme Saint Denis »
reply
share
mikecampaul
13 years ago
just hard to belive global warming ,with all these scientist on the un payroll , there big group of sceintist( the group of 1000 or something )had sectaries on it and other scientist had to sigh or be fired , the email scadal ( proof positive if u dont walk in lockstep with the man made global warming they will try to destroy u ) , they use to grow grapes in england and greeland was green , i feel it just a way for some ppl to make money , prpoly trying to get rich countries to subdise poor ones with cap and trade , and most resonable smart ppl are not going to fall for this global warming *beep*
reply
share
Rangely8723
13 years ago
with all these scientist on the un payroll
What are you talking about? The vast majority of climate scientists are working for completely different organisiations, universities, institutions etc. worldwide. Not even 0.000001% is on the UN payroll.
the email scadal
There never was such a scandal.
they use to grow grapes in england and greeland was green
The Medieval Warm Period wasn't a global event. It was warmer in Europe and some parts of the NH, but in most regions of the SH and most parts of Asia it was much cooler than nowadays. Overall, it was globally cooler at the time.
BTW, Greenland never was an overall green land. Only the coastal regions of Greenland were a little greener and more fertile than today.
and most resonable smart ppl are not going to fall for this global warming *beep*
Actually there is a wide consensus among the scientists:
>97% of all climate scientists who do active research and publish agree that threre is an AGW
>88% of all climate scientists (including those who aren't researchers who publish) agree that there is an AGW
>82% of all scientists agree that there is an AGW.
(->"Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change"; Doran / Kendall-Zimmermann, 2009)
« Et moi, je lui ferai porter la sienne comme Saint Denis »
reply
share