• 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!

Climate Change Evidence Mounts

vegas giants said:
Well except the bible doesnt have any peer reviewed research in it.....so theres that
Click to expand...
If you are not citing the relevant section, who says it has peer review?
 
longview said:
NASA's web site is mirror of the IPCC's statements.
Look at their Evidence page,
Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet
What is the first reference,

If you bother to look, you would see that their claimed evidence is not actually scientific evidence.
Yes, global temperatures have warmed, and yes, so have CO2 levels.
but that alone is not evidence that the two events are linked, or make any statement about
how sensitive the climate is to added CO2.
Click to expand...

Really long? Are you really going back to lying about this again?? After all the debates we have had. All the different studies I have shown you. Have you forgotten about Feldman et al that you have cited dozens of times?

I guess since you have finally excepted the fact that you can't misrepresent all those studies to prove your denialist beliefs you have just chosen to forget them completely.

You really don't have any shame... do you?
 
calamity said:
And, so do the problems associated with it.

Remember, Methane is worse than CO2.

And, there is a lot of it bubbling up these days.
Click to expand...

Not to fear. Once the democrats regain control of the government they will spend tens of trillions of dollars hiring team players to rid the earth of cows, gasoline engines, airplanes, electric plants and other damaging industrial advances made after the pure air stone age.
 
Climate ‘limits’ and timelines

Posted on October 16, 2019 by curryja | 12 comments
by Judith Curry
Some thoughts in response to a query from a reporter.
Continue reading →

JC conclusion
Bottom line is that these timelines are meaningless. While we have confidence in the sign of the temperature change, we have no idea what its magnitude will turn out to be. Apart from uncertainties in emissions and the Earth’s carbon cycle, we are still facing a factor of 3 or more uncertainty in the sensitivity of the Earth’s climate to CO2, and we have no idea how natural climate variability (solar, volcanoes, ocean oscillations) will play out in the 21st century. And even if we did have significant confidence in the amount of global warming, we still don’t have much of a handle on how this will change extreme weather events. With regards to species and ecosystems, land use and exploitation is a far bigger issue.

 
longview said:
I am not sure it matters who is running the site.
What ,matters is that the site implies something that is not in evidence.
Click to expand...

When the doomsayers claim that the site is proof of AGW and is written by climate scientists, then yes, whoever runs the site is part of the discussion.
 
Lord of Planar said:
No it isn't.

It's a lie, using the instantaneous slope of change. As many times as I have explained whet RE (radiative efficiency) and GWP (global warming potential) actually mean, you guys still deny the science behind it.

You guys are so easily duped by the agenda.
Click to expand...

What agenda? The agenda to do something about climate change?
 
PoS said:
LOL nothing but a bunch of oceanographers and chemists- no climatlogists. Did you even read their CVs? :lamo
Click to expand...

How many years have I been saying that climate dot nasa dot gove is nothing but a fancy blog?
 
vegas giants said:
Are you saying the NASA site does not contain dozens of links to peer reviewed research???
Click to expand...

That NASA sub-site is a typical example of where the presenters misrepresent what the science actually says.
 
Buzz said:
Really long? Are you really going back to lying about this again?? After all the debates we have had. All the different studies I have shown you. Have you forgotten about Feldman et al that you have cited dozens of times?

I guess since you have finally excepted the fact that you can't misrepresent all those studies to prove your denialist beliefs you have just chosen to forget them completely.

You really don't have any shame... do you?
Click to expand...
Buzz, a person cannot cite an entire web site, and simply say, "THERE IS THE EVIDENCE" without pointing out the
section that they think contains the evidence! My analogy stands, it is like pointing to the bible and saying the proof is in there.
 
longview said:
Buzz, a person cannot cite an entire web site, and simply say, "THERE IS THE EVIDENCE" without pointing out the
section that they think contains the evidence! My analogy stands, it is like pointing to the bible and saying the proof is in there.
Click to expand...

There is this big link called Evidence.


Try clicking on that
 
Lord of Planar said:
How many years have I been saying that climate dot nasa dot gove is nothing but a fancy blog?
Click to expand...

It links to some of the finest AGW research in the world.


Try reading it sometime
 
vegas giants said:
There is this big link called Evidence.


Try clicking on that
Click to expand...
Even better, try looking at it and citing something that you think is actually scientific evidence that
CO2 actually causes warming, I am not saying that CO2 cannot cause warming, but you are claiming
that the evidence is in that section, I say it is not, if you still think it is, you need to point it out exactly.
 
longview said:
Even better, try looking at it and citing something that you think is actually scientific evidence that
CO2 actually causes warming, I am not saying that CO2 cannot cause warming, but you are claiming
that the evidence is in that section, I say it is not, if you still think it is, you need to point it out exactly.
Click to expand...

Why? You believe co2 causes warming already
 
longview said:
Buzz, a person cannot cite an entire web site, and simply say, "THERE IS THE EVIDENCE" without pointing out the
section that they think contains the evidence! My analogy stands, it is like pointing to the bible and saying the proof is in there.
Click to expand...

That's all the evidence he needs. His confirmation bias agrees.

Rachel Maddow site.

Common Dreams site.

The Guardian site.

Real Climate, etc.
 
vegas giants said:
There is this big link called Evidence.


Try clicking on that
Click to expand...

So select one of the papers listed, and give us a meaningful quote.

Not what the author of that page lies about.
 
longview said:
Even better, try looking at it and citing something that you think is actually scientific evidence that
CO2 actually causes warming, I am not saying that CO2 cannot cause warming, but you are claiming
that the evidence is in that section, I say it is not, if you still think it is, you need to point it out exactly.
Click to expand...

Only a total fool things that site is actual evidence.
 
longview said:
Buzz, a person cannot cite an entire web site, and simply say, "THERE IS THE EVIDENCE" without pointing out the
section that they think contains the evidence! My analogy stands, it is like pointing to the bible and saying the proof is in there.
Click to expand...

Thats because the climate apocalypse is a religion to them, these silly websites are their bibles. :mrgreen:
 
PoS said:
Thats because the climate apocalypse is a religion to them, these silly websites are their bibles. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

When deniers dismiss agencies like NASA and the national institute of science and dozens of other national science academies all over the world as "silly websites" ..... I just laugh and laugh. Lol
 
PoS said:
Thats because the climate apocalypse is a religion to them, these silly websites are their bibles. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Maybe if you read one you’d be able to understand the difference between directly measured temps and proxy temps.
 
Here is the list of agencies that support that silly website.

Let's just start with the A's.....


Academia Chilena de Ciencias, ChileAcademia das Ciencias de Lisboa, PortugalAcademia de Ciencias de la República DominicanaAcademia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de VenezuelaAcademia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de GuatemalaAcademia Mexicana de Ciencias,MexicoAcademia Nacional de Ciencias de BoliviaAcademia Nacional de Ciencias del PeruAcadémie des Sciences et Techniques du SénégalAcadémie des Sciences, FranceAcademies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of CanadaAcademy of AthensAcademy of Science of MozambiqueAcademy of Science of South AfricaAcademy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)Academy of Sciences MalaysiaAcademy of Sciences of MoldovaAcademy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicAcademy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of IranAcademy of Scientific Research and Technology, EgyptAcademy of the Royal Society of New ZealandAccademia Nazionale dei Lincei, ItalyAfrica Centre for Climate and Earth Systems ScienceAfrican Academy of SciencesAlbanian Academy of SciencesAmazon Environmental Research InstituteAmerican Academy of PediatricsAmerican Anthropological AssociationAmerican Association for the Advancement of ScienceAmerican Association of State Climatologists (AASC)American Association of Wildlife VeterinariansAmerican Astronomical SocietyAmerican Chemical SocietyAmerican College of Preventive MedicineAmerican Fisheries SocietyAmerican Geophysical UnionAmerican Institute of Biological SciencesAmerican Institute of PhysicsAmerican Meteorological SocietyAmerican Physical SocietyAmerican Public Health AssociationAmerican Quaternary AssociationAmerican Society for MicrobiologyAmerican Society of AgronomyAmerican Society of Civil EngineersAmerican Society of Plant BiologistsAmerican Statistical AssociationAssociation of Ecosystem Research CentersAustralian Academy of ScienceAustralian Bureau of MeteorologyAustralian Coral Reef SocietyAustralian Institute of Marine ScienceAustralian Institute of PhysicsAustralian Marine Sciences AssociationAustralian Medical AssociationAustralian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society**
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom