Another hole in Global Warming Supporters

And Lord Monkton - spokesperson for the denialists has been wrong so many time we have lost count

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Passage

Another classic straw man brought to you by the denialists

Claim that WE are claiming the north west passage has never been navigated before - and no-one is claiming that

Just that it is now open as a shipping route

 

That which does not cause mass extinction would be a favourite

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/ecosystems.html#ref5

 

So yeah, due to global warming, the Northwest Passage opened recently, allowing for commercial shipping.

Sorry if the facts burn.

 

But I wasn't talking about him...Al Gore is and was always wrong!!!

 

I am sick and tired of hearing about an American ex-politician and particularly as him being held up as the only and sole authority on global warming. So, every time he is mentioned I talk about the denialist equivalent - Lord Monckton

Bet I can prove Monckton is a bigger liar and a loony!

 

So is Al Gore.

 

So is he the sole authority on climate change?

 

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Monckton doesn't believe in climate change...Al Gore does. What point exactly are you trying to make?

 

IS the head of the UN's IPCC?

 

Hmmmmm - colossal misread of my posts - I will put it simply

If Gore represents believers in global warming then Monckton represents those who deny it is occurring

 

OK...now what?

 

Bet I can prove Monckton is a bigger dingbat than Gore and best of all Monckton is using most of the denialist claims so disproving him shows what a load of crock people are believing

 

Hmmmm.....who's to better understand the workings of NASA, the Mayor, an aerospace engineer, or you?

The Mayor it is.

Just in case you missed the memo, there's no public will for NASA to waste money on Mars anymore, or much of anything else. In the meantime, when the Stupids were busy (*)(*)(*)(*)ting their pants over the Chicken Little Hoax of Global Warming, the bureauthugs at NASA pushed it as far as it would go to pay for missions. That's how things get done in Washington.

You're not suffering under some delusion that NASA isn't just another Washington bureaucracy fighting for budget, are you?

No, you're not suffering at all, you're a True Believer.

 

In other words, you have absolutely nothing. Thanks for playing. By the way, in the scientific community, what you call "group think" they call consensus.

 

By the way, in the ACTUAL scientific community, they establish PROOF via SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

"Consensus", plus a bus token, is worth a ride downtown.....

 

You mean the actual scientific community that includes 97% of climate scientists and every prominent scientific organization? It really is pathetic how you let yourself be co-opted by the energy industry and used as a pawn. Sorry to be mean, but it's true and I legitimately feel bad for you and your ilk.

 

NO, the actual scientific community.

Your claim about "97% of scinstists" is total bullcrap, BTW.

Back it up, or RETRACT IT.

Meanwhile, any alleged "scientist" pretending that "consensus" = SCIENTIFIC PROOF, is an idiot,and a liar, and I don't really care how many other idiots/liars agree with him, quite frankly.

BS in Chemistry, UMR. (Now known as Missouri Institute of Science and Technology. Just called "Rolla", when I went there.)

How about you? What do you ACTUALLY KNOW about establishing VALID scientific PROOF?

"Consensus" has not one dammed thing to do with it. There was once "scientific consensus" that the world was flat; they were wrong , too.

 

Nice dodge - Pity about the lack of validation, fact or truth

 

They have

Internet meme "Just because you have not found it does not mean it does not exist"

There is a tonne of evidence out there but when presented to the denialists the goal posts keep shifting because THAT is not the evidence that they "require" as "proof"

Notice how little is actually stated or defined in relation to exactly what proof is "missing"

 

Hardly.

There is a "ton" of COMPLETE SPECULATION, much of which is based on "PROJECTED DATA", as opposed to EMPRICAL DATA.

My goalposts have NEVER MOVED.

Show me a baro/chemical/hydro test, in a closed system PROVING the thermal effects of less than 400PPM CO2, in an atmospheric mixture copy of the Earth's atmosphere.

NOt some IDIOT releasing a CO2 can into an aquarium, claiming that proves it.

 

Only last time they did move - now what exactly is it you want us to "prove" or rather "disprove"
Are you expecting temperature rises?
Are you only looking for the effect of CO2 upon infrared radiation?

What exactly is it you are wanting

This dates back to the early eighties and has some of what you SEEM to want
http://people.oregonstate.edu/~schmita2/ATS421-521/2013/papers/hansen81sci.pdf

then there is this
http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm

 

Still trying to float this complete nonsense by ?

No it isn't. That is nowhere NEAR a scientifically valid test, as a model of the effects of atmospheric levels of less than 400PPM (.0004) CO2, in the Earth's atmosphere.

That is nothng more than a GENERIC OP-ED GENERALIZING about the EXPECTED effects of UNSPECIFIED LEVELS of CO2, in a SPECULATED ENVIRONMENT.

Show me a baro/chemical/hydro test, in a closed system PROVING the thermal effects of less than 400PPM CO2, in an atmospheric mixture copy of the Earth's atmosphere.

Read much?

There was NO CHEMICAL TEST DONE.

Good grief....

 

Warmest November Ever

 

Consensus is a political invention and not science. The millions of government dollars invested in climate models outweighs anything spent buy anyone else. So far the models have failed pretty spectacularly with the recent hiatus in warming which points out that if you cannot model it, you should not trust the model. All of the global warming alarmism is based on those models.