Climate predictions may be wrong, new study finds

I think the Bigfoot crowd says the same thing about their opposition. LOL

 

the evidence, you know the test that was run to validate the hypothesis? Just copy and paste the material that backs your claim. Do you not understand what that means? I mean, you should be well aware of the facts that conclude the hypothesis and be able to post that right up. I mean it's so well known and all.

- - - Updated - - -

ahh the logical fallacy. so cliche..

 

You mean the same test we have for evolution.....that kind of test? LOL

 

The science is settled or don't you even know what that means?

 

Why don't they say ANWHERE that AGW has been proven to 100% fact? You are simply lying now and are embarrassed you got caught. LOL

 

Fairly limited ?? What is the range of climate model scenarios in terms of global temperature rise in 2100 ?? And why have none of these climate models been validated by running and correcting them to agree with a fixed number of years and then using the results from those same models in comparison with a different fixed number of years (30 years seems to be an agreed upon number) ?? We have reasonable data starting from the end of WWII.

The negative consequences that the alarmists refer to come from the model outputs which "predict" the highest temperatures. The lower limit models over predict real world temperatures. The climate sensitivity to CO2 gleaned from looking at the actual data indicates warming of ~ 1 deg C by 2100 which have net positive benefits for the globe. Application of the precautionary principle based on the alarmist upper limits in the creation of Draconian public policy which will significantly and adversely impact a countries economy will never happen - that's Roger Pielke Jr.'s Iron Law.

Global temperatures will continually increase, human CO2 emissions will have a part of that, this increase will be monitored, and the human race will adapt to local changes (financed by increasing global wealth creation) as required.

 

Ya...Belief in AGW is analogous to belief in Bigfoot.

 

Uh.....Does every science agency in the world believe in bigfoot? LOL

 

There isn't a scientific consensus that Bigfoot is real.

 

The best and most appropriate example of the failure of peer review is the MBH98 paper.

 

Peer review is used for the medications you take, the cars you drive, the planes you fly in, the water you drink and the food you eat and on and on and on. BUT IT CAN NOT BE USED FOR AGW! LOL

 

Nobody could be more embarrassing than you but you don't even realize how little you know.

 

You are a good little soldier for the oil and coal companies.

 

Yes there is....In fact, there is a world wide consensus that Bigfoot exists......which holds about the same relevance as AGW.

 

Not surprised you are unaware of the problems in medical peer review.

 

Medical peer-review is imperfect. It is just vastly, vastly, vastly more reliable that what you are doing. This is why we see doctors when we are sick.

 

Honest peer review is clearly beneficial. Dishonest peer review is dangerous. Those who peer reviewed the MBH98 paper did not do due diligence in checking the statistical methods and the data itself nor did they question the elimination of the MWP and LIA whose existence has been verified by a great many peer reviewed scientific investigations. The way science should work is that each new theory (and the Mann elimination of the MWP and the LIA was indeed a new theory) should be challenged via analysis to determine if the new theory can be falsified. In the case of the Hockey Stick the BIG GOV funded BIG SCIENCE machine set out to prove Mann correct. Why - because the UN (Club of Rome) needed graphic showing the global warming correlated with increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration. Mann (and the entire Hockey Team) has subsequently been shown to be non transparent, dishonest, discredited, and incorrect.

 

You sir are nuttier than a fruit cake

 

That's because they are in on the conspiracy.....The Illuminati....shhhhhh

 

Not surprised you actually think that is a valid argument.

- - - Updated - - -

And die taking many of their medications.

 

You are the one who raised the subject of Bigfoot to somehow bolster your failed notion. It backfired on you so now you use the refuge of losers...The personal attack which, BTW, runs afoul of Forum rules.

 

I await your evidence. Hilarious

 

...........................

- - - Updated - - -

neanderthals were more right than you. I agree.

- - - Updated - - -

View attachment 42374
..............................

- - - Updated - - -

can you answer that? I believe you can!

- - - Updated - - -

no, it relies on the FDA. When are you going to get some learnen son?

 

yep, and they take your temperature, your height, your weight, ask to look in your mouth and ear. then they shrug their shoulders and say, well, there is a new drug out that may help, spend 30 bucks and take it for two weeks. If the symptom doesn't reside, let us know. you mean that kind of doctoring? You should educate yourself on just how many drugs do jack. yep! Do doctors prescribe placebos? Do you know what they do?

Oh, and read the side effects to taking most any medicine. Holy cow, the list is sooooooooo long. yep, the pill can be worse than the symptom. DOH!

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bigfoot-existence-backed-dna-video-report-article-1.1473883

excerpt:
" Bigfoot is real, and there's now both DNA and video evidence to prove it, claims one group of devoted Sasquatch researchers.

The group's "never-before-seen footage" of an alleged Bigfoot creature sleeping in the woods of Kentucky has been presented this week along with various blood and hair samples said to be unlike anything seen before.

The group's startling statements are supposedly backed by 11 outside laboratories and universities, which all reviewed the findings, and which were provided with blind samples, according to the report by the Sasquatch Genome Project."

BTW, this information is hundred times more than anything you've presented to back your AGW claim. Busted.