- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 16,326
- Reactions
- 8,344
other regions of the planet are only showing warming via arbitrary adjustments and/or improper citing of weather stations.
Don't waste your time BS with me Wayne when you state
Have a go at The Royal Society, Scientific American, Creationists (!) and scientists who observe the changes in plant and animal behaviour as the planet warms.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/
http://www.icr.org/article/3233/
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v421/n6918/abs/nature01333.html
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/364/1534/3321.abstract
http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2010/4294972962.pdf
http://royalsociety.org/policy/publications/2010/climate-change-summary-science/
http://www.pnas.org/content/103/39/14288.full
Don't waste your time BS with me Wayne when you state
we do not live in a linear world, its very obvious to me you shouldnt be talking about maths when making points, take note for future
Whitey impress us all with your mathematical acumen and show us, as your teacher would have insisted, with method, your calculations that show the increase of 280ppm to 390ppm (so thats 110ppm increase industrial mans contribution of carbon dioxide, you come to this result by subtracting the smaller number from the larger one ) is a contribution of 3% as stated in posts #3534 and #3634 and others, by someone as equally 'independently' psychologically arranged as yourself.
Here's the future 'me presenting you with an ignoble prize for a none existent branch of mathematics '
Rudy Kalmam is still with us, send him your working sheet. give him a laugh.
Oh and Wayne if your out there, and we know you are(way out there) Loved the clipping from 1923, by extension the deck chairs and Pina colada's will soon be out side by side with fossilised shell fish atop Everest. And how are going on outing those old Koch Brothers as closet Fabians...
but you've chosen to remain quite on the Koch's independent study , ignore it long enough it will go away... which is kinda sorta what Max Planck had to say about those unable to adjust to a new reality.
and other regions of the planet are only showing warming via arbitrary adjustments and/or improper citing of weather stations.
and other regions of the planet are only showing warming via arbitrary adjustments and/or improper citing of weather stations.
Like I said, just a troll with confirmation bias.
In view of new evidence regarding arbitrary upward adjustments and station sitings, I have revised my view of temperature changes downward.
?
Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within four years
As sea ice shrinks to record lows, Prof Peter Wadhams warns a 'global disaster' is now unfolding in northern latitudes
One of the world's leading ice experts has predicted the final collapse of Arctic sea ice in summer months within four years.
In what he calls a "global disaster" now unfolding in northern latitudes as the sea area that freezes and melts each year shrinks to its lowest extent ever recorded, Prof Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University calls for "urgent" consideration of new ideas to reduce global temperatures.
Well that all makes sense- in a Kaffasque type of way. According to the new evidence you have seen there is no global warming to worry about.
Thats great isn't it Wayne? It means we can go to sleep soundly at night and be assured that those heat waves, wild weather and droughts are just figments of our imagination that really arn't happening because there is now new evidence that global warming isn't happening.
I started this recent little flurry with the observation that summer ice in the Arctic reached its lowest level and appears almost certainly to be running down on an exponitial scale. To put it simply as more ice melts, the Arctic ocean absorbs far more summer heat which in turn will melt more ice.
These are the facts on the ground. There are a million other similar facts that indicate the earth is warming rapidly and will continue to do so. Coming up with some cherry picked, tricky set of numbers to "prove" otherwise just makes the proponents completely irrelevant to the debate.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/17/arctic-collapse-sea-ice
in 4 years when nothing happens will you and scientists of this ilk please shutup
Further to Basilo's requests for confirmation. The above quote to me at least strikes as, "Head in the sand" but that just might be me. I need conformation to be sure.
But those with Whitey's mathematical acumen can deduce 97% of scientist opinion of those who work in the field of climatic research as being a ridiculously small minority easily dismissed .
....A quick glance at scientific discoveries throughout history (even as recently as the past century) should highlight the problem with basing unproven theories on a "consensus" of peers. On many occasions I've witnessed the voice of reason being drowned out by a chorus of fashionable opinion...
in 4 years when nothing happens will you and scientists of this ilk please shutup
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?