'Climate Anger':Last Refuge of the Alarmists

Yeah...like "paleo-psychologists"....now there's some real "science" for ya, huh?

 

Your claims are not credible because:

1 - the claim that "97% of climate scientists agree..." have been so thoroughly debunked that its a joke to even attempt to make that claim

2 - the catastrophic events predicted by warmists never materialized.

3 - the models don't match observations, which at a minimum means all the warmists models are wrong. Since the models is what you base you claims on, your claims have no credibility.

4 - and finally, warmists waved the scientific method in everyones faces for 20 years and claimed they were objective and just looked at the data - until the data conflicts with their religion.

Go home, global warming is over. No carbon tax and cap-and-trade for you, and that's what this is really all about - money.

 

No, it's been confirmed over and over. Denying that you're part of a kook fringe won't magically make you not part of a kook fringe.

Because they never made such predictions. Now, the predictions they did actually make came true. That's why climate scientists have such credibility, because they've been getting everything right for decades now. In contrast, deniers keep failing hard with every prediction, which is why the world rightfully considers them to be a joke. For example, the deniers have been predicting strong cooling for the past decade, yet the world keeps warming strongly.

In the real world, the models have been very good. Real scientists know that. Deniers, having been fooled by their cult's propaganda (Goddard especially specializes in faking such data), don't understand it, but that's their problem. It's yet another reason why the world ignores them.

Also, the models aren't even necessary. They're just icing on the cake. The directly measured evidence proves global warming. The stratospheric cooling, increase in backradiation and decrease in outgoing longwave in the GHG bands are all smoking guns for human-caused global warming. There is no "natural cycles" theory that explains such direct observations, therefore any such "natural cycles" theory is crap.

Nice projection. We don't discard data, while deniers make a religion of discarding data. All the data has always said deniers are completely wrong about everything. So what do deniers do? Do they act like rational people and change their theory to fit the data? No. They scream how all of the data must be faked.

That's one reason we know denialism is pseudoscience. Another reason we know is because denialism is not disprovable. I've asked deniers over and over what would disprove their theory, and I always get crickets in response. Religions can't be disproved. In contrast, global warming science could be disproved in many ways, being that it's real science.

As expected, we get a kook conspiracy theory about the VastSecretGlobalSocialistPlot. All deniers are just political cultists now, card-carrying members of the right wing extremist fringe cult. In direct contrast, good climate science crosses all political boundaries all across the world. Because it's science, not politics. While the deniers rave about their socialist bogeymen, the real scientists do science.

 

That's a standard cult technique, telling the cult acolytes that the outside world is full of enemies who are oppressing them.

Jonestown was the best example. Grok, you and the other deniers might want to start planning to quietly slip away into the jungle now. Your cult is plainly dying, and you'll want to escape before they haul out the koolaid vat.

That is, unless you're diehard true believers, good soldiers who will be forcing all the others to drink before gladly taking that big final swig yourself.

 

The 97% claim came from the Cook paper, I read it and debunked it myself right here in this forum. Many others have shown Cook manipulated the data, the papers showing Cooks cooking the data are all over the internet. Go read them (but you won't, warmistas don't read science).


And you lose:

 

Congratulations, you could copy-and-paste Goddard's faked graph. Good for you. However, since I had already pointed out how deniers rely so heavily on Goddard's faked data, confirming my point may not have been the greatest idea.

The deniers only have a handful of people doing any work, who endlessly refer back to each others' faked data. "Inbred" is one way to put it. "Epistemic closure" is the more formal term. It's not just denialism. The American extreme right has created its own special reality, retreated into it, and declared the entire outside world is conspiring against them. Denialism is just one specific example of that behavior. Denialism isn't the actual cult, right wing extremism is the cult, with denialism being one required belief of that cult.

 

The magnetic North pole has been moving fast recently. This means the magma underneath the earth’s crust is moving. I speculate this creates hotspots. More heat gets to the surface when it is moving fast. Google “magnetic north pole moving”. From 1831 to 1900 it hardly moved. Is it a coincidence the mini-ice age ended in 1850?

I know for a fact the Romans did not cause global warming from 100 AD to 400 AD. What caused the Roman warm period when the temperatures were hotter than now?

For a graph of the magnetic north pole from 200 AD to present see: http://poleshift.com/magnetic-north-pole. Be sure to enlarge it to 700x700 picels.

For a graph of the magnetic north pole from 1831 to 2010 see: http://otbpmaps.com/magnetic-declination/.