• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global [W:478]

Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Anyone know if we have witness as large of a Coronal Hole in the sun, as the one we are witnessing since July?



Link in above pic.

another: NASA SOHO site
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Why would I do such a silly thing?

Gravity has been quantified, and there is no dispute in the scientific community about it.

How many scientists disagree with the values assigned to gravity? can you think of any?

Several scientists dispute the warming values given to CO2.

Seven compared to what, hundreds? Thousands?
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

I already know there is a consensus. What exactly are they consenting to and what is the proof that the consensus is justified? Do they all agree there is some effect from CO2? The whole effect comes from CO2? What is the exact thing that they all are agreeing to?

Why do you continue to repeat the same thing over and over? Make one assertion and back it up with evidence.

As an example, you could assert and demonstrate that CO2 is prime driver of climate or demonstrate exactly what contribution warming CO2 has. That's all I'm asking.

Are you incapable of producing this?

There are at least 50 forcing factors for warming and climate change. To quantify the effect of one, you must quantify the effect of all. For your first attempt, though, I will accept the definition of the quantity of the effect from only the effect of CO2.

If you determine that CO2 is the prime driver of warming, please be prepared to explain why the warming stops and drops despite the continuous and constant rise of CO2.

View attachment 67151904
As it is among scientist, who are scientist and not bakers, their consensus is on the science.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Seven compared to what, hundreds? Thousands?
Seven disagree with the formula behind gravity/acceleration?

I have a hard time believing that.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Seven disagree with the formula behind gravity/acceleration?

I have a hard time believing that.

Seven versus hundreds? Thousands?

Btw several was your number, not mind. But no matter, the fact it is such a small number as to be serious outliners.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Seven versus hundreds? Thousands?

Btw several was your number, not mind. But no matter, the fact it is such a small number as to be serious outliners.

LOL...

OK, you misread "several" for "seven."

I guess you don't know seven who disagree with gravity after-all...

I was really curious who they were.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

LOL...

OK, you misread "several" for "seven."

I guess you don't know seven who disagree with gravity after-all...

I was really curious who they were.

No, that's want the word means, in the area of seven.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

As it is among scientist, who are scientist and not bakers, their consensus is on the science.


What in the science are the consenting to? Do the all agree that CO2 is responsible for ALL of the warming? 75%? 50%? 25%? Do some think it's it's more like 75% while other s think it's more like 5%?

You are saying they all agree but won't reveal what they are agreeing about.

Do they all agree that the ocean is soaking up all the warming? Do they all agree that the CO2 is keeping radiation from escaping into space?

You seem to think that you are saying something, but you are not.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

I understand the language just find. But, when I want a car fixed, I consult a mechanic. I could listen to the waiter at Perkins, but I tend to use the mechanic. When I'm sick or injured I consult a doctor. I could ask cashier at Walmart, but I ask the doctor instead. And when I want to know about science, I consult scientist. I could listen to Rush, but I'm funny about thinking those who've actually studied something generally no more.

I've seen all the rebuttals. Addressed a few here that were wild misrepresentations. Certainly if someone presented something that wasn't so easily shown to be silliness, you might have a case. But to think you're a true thinker while ignoring best evidence is akin to saying I'm a professional football player while ignoring I'm not aid to play for any team.



Have you presented any evidence?
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

I know a bit about natural science and did an introductory amount of reading of climate science. That was all I needed to tear apart Planar's nonsense. It takes a little while you have to do some research but once you figure out what he's doing its just pathetic. You uses big terms, math, makes it all look really complicated and solid, like he knows what he's talking about. But once you break it down you will find he's just making crap up, absolutely ridiculous arguments that make no sense whatsoever.



Why is every model prepared by every expert using the Science of AGW always wrong?
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

What in the science are the consenting to? Do the all agree that CO2 is responsible for ALL of the warming? 75%? 50%? 25%? Do some think it's it's more like 75% while other s think it's more like 5%?

You are saying they all agree but won't reveal what they are agreeing about.

Do they all agree that the ocean is soaking up all the warming? Do they all agree that the CO2 is keeping radiation from escaping into space?

You seem to think that you are saying something, but you are not.

Well, you can read that as I've linked it. But the consent to GW being real and that man plays a role.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

No, you just think you can. You play hat with other novices, ignore evidence, and declare your brilliance. It's a common Internet trick, but most know it's bs.



If this is true, then all of the evidence will support it. If even one bit of evidence disagrees with your conclusion, this is not science. It is opinion.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Nonsense. I quoted peer review journals as well on all of that. I'm sure you and j prefer the American nonThinker and conservapedia, but the fact remains, there us a clear and overwhelming consensus.



From that clear and overwhelming consensus, you should be able to pull the nugget of proof that is ALWAYS right regarding the rise of temperature as a result of anthropogenic causes.

Where's that 30 year old prediction that is correct and accurate?
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Boo Radley, you're wasting your time. These people run these games over and over. They change their position every post to refute whatever it is you're saying. They demand you provide "proof". Once you provide proof they claim its a conspiracy or there is something wrong with it. They just go in loops trying to tire people out so that they can spew their bs without rebuttal. Being that this forum is dominated by conservatives its not hard to do.

No matter how well you destroy their arguments over and over, 100 out of 100, they will come back the next day saying the same crap and all their little helpers will chime in with the same bs they said the week before that was easily destroyed.

I don't know if they're paid or crazy, but its a lost cause really.



I don't believe that i have ever referred to a conspiracy and I only ask that you provide proof. The climate has been changing for several billion years and seems to be continuing. Within the Holocene, the temperature seems to have vasilated within about a 2 degree range and we are smack dab in the middle of that range right now.

YOU are saying that the current climate change is radically different than the past. I only ask that you prove that assertion and tie it to the rise of CO2.

If this is the actual condition of things, this should be easy to show, as easy as it is to show that Gravity acts on all things on the planet at all times.

You are free to proceed.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

If this is true, then all of the evidence will support it. If even one bit of evidence disagrees with your conclusion, this is not science. It is opinion.

Unless of course you cherry pick something that isn't the argument, or misrepresent what's being said, or present something as factual that isn't. Go back to the article on tricks your side uses. ;)
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

From that clear and overwhelming consensus, you should be able to pull the nugget of proof that is ALWAYS right regarding the rise of temperature as a result of anthropogenic causes.

Where's that 30 year old prediction that is correct and accurate?

Again, the evidence is there for you.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

It gets tired doesn't it...

It's like talking to a wall with this boo boo guy/woman whatever...



He/she is like a parrot who just repeats, "There's a consensus! Squawk!"
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

He/she is like a parrot who just repeats, "There's a consensus! Squawk!"

Because it is my point. So of course I'll repeat it. As we're novice, the consensus matters.

Oh, and I'm a he.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

You may want to brush up on critical thinking skills.

Sure the media is biased, but not everything they say is useless. If you're intelligent and know how to read between the lines you can extract a lot of useful information from them. If you're intelligent you also know to check with many different media outlets with opposing views. You also know to check the motives behind each media source, the author of the articles. You research it all and take away from it what you determine to have a decent amount of credibility. But this is all besides the point.

The media isn't the driving force behind climate change, scientists are. So dismissing media because they are biased and also dismissing climate change because some media champion it is not logical in the least but you went ahead and made that argument anyway.

Your arguments are bad, your logic is bad, but who cares right?



I thought CO2 was the driving force behind climate change. Well, this reveals plenty.

Are you going to have turn in your Junior Climate Man Badge for letting this slip?
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Unless of course you cherry pick something that isn't the argument, or misrepresent what's being said, or present something as factual that isn't. Go back to the article on tricks your side uses. ;)



Well then, present any evidence that is evidence. How about that climate prediction based on AGW Science from 30 years ago that we can compare to the actual performance of the climate.

Remember, the climate has been changing for billions of years. AGW Diehards are demanding we believe that the changes which are continuing have risen from a new and unique cause.

It is up to you to prove that.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Again, the evidence is there for you.



Which you apparently cannot produce. Why do you vigorously assert this when you cannot even explain it?
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Because it is my point. So of course I'll repeat it. As we're novice, the consensus matters.

Oh, and I'm a he.



I kind of figured you were and then the previous poster raised the question and I didn't want to offend. In a different forum I was conversing with a white lady of about 75 years for about a year and discovered at that length of time that she was not the militant black 25 year old male depicted in her avatar.

Anyway, if that is your only point, you really need to examine what the problems with the hypothesis are.

Primary among the problems is that this is still a hypothesis despite being under review for decades. It does no meet even one of the criteria to be a scientific Theory and THAT all by itself should reveal something to you about the consensus.


Scientific theory - Ask.com Encyclopedia

A body of descriptions of knowledge is usually only called a theory if it has fulfilled these criteria:

It makes falsifiable predictions with consistent accuracy across a broad area of scientific inquiry (such as mechanics).
It is well-supported by many independent strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation. This ensures that it is probably a good approximation, if not completely correct.
It is consistent with pre-existing theories and other experimental results. (Its predictions may differ slightly from pre-existing theories in cases where they are more accurate than before.)
It can be adapted and modified to account for new evidence as it is discovered, thus increasing its predictive capability over time.
It is among the most parsimonious explanations, sparing in proposed entities or explanations. (See Occam's razor. Since there is no generally accepted objective definition of parsimony, this is not a strict criterion, but some theories are much less economical than others.)
The first three criteria are the most important. Theories considered scientific meet at least most of the criteria, but ideally all of them. This is true of such established theories as special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, plate tectonics, evolution, etc.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

No, that's want the word means, in the area of seven.

I disagree.

Regardless, you should know there are many more than "seven" scientists out there who disagree with the more common viewpoint.

In this case, I think you are taking a tangent to argue a term that at worse, I misused.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Well then, present any evidence that is evidence. How about that climate prediction based on AGW Science from 30 years ago that we can compare to the actual performance of the climate.

Remember, the climate has been changing for billions of years. AGW Diehards are demanding we believe that the changes which are continuing have risen from a new and unique cause.

It is up to you to prove that.

I've done that already, many times.
 
Re: Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warm

Scientific theory - Ask.com Encyclopedia

A body of descriptions of knowledge is usually only called a theory if it has fulfilled these criteria:

It makes falsifiable predictions with consistent accuracy across a broad area of scientific inquiry (such as mechanics).
It is well-supported by many independent strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation. This ensures that it is probably a good approximation, if not completely correct.
It is consistent with pre-existing theories and other experimental results. (Its predictions may differ slightly from pre-existing theories in cases where they are more accurate than before.)
It can be adapted and modified to account for new evidence as it is discovered, thus increasing its predictive capability over time.
It is among the most parsimonious explanations, sparing in proposed entities or explanations. (See Occam's razor. Since there is no generally accepted objective definition of parsimony, this is not a strict criterion, but some theories are much less economical than others.)
The first three criteria are the most important. Theories considered scientific meet at least most of the criteria, but ideally all of them. This is true of such established theories as special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, plate tectonics, evolution, etc.

Funny.

I don't see consensus anywhere in that definition.

What am I missing?
 
Back
Top Bottom