- Joined
- Jul 17, 2020
- Messages
- 34,475
- Reaction score
- 14,659
- Location
- Springfield MO
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
NOAA is a political as well as scientific organization.
Standard denier talking point that means absolutely NOTHING.
NOAA is a political as well as scientific organization.
Not arguing about warming, just pointing out it's not as drastic as scare mongers are claiming. Look at the graft in your link. It shows a gain of ! degree Celsius in over 60 years.
The key thing is that climate and climate change occurs over spans of decades or more. And when data that documents temps, storms, hurricane intensities, and forest fires show very little increases over those time frames.
The question is why?The “great agencies” ignored the hyperthermal events.
You’ll have to ask them.The question is why?
Nearly 200 of them by the way
No I am asking you.You’ll have to ask them.
Most of that most is a compilation of several climatology books, blo. gs and websites. The problem with climate science unlike most sciences is that it's essentially impossible to conduct experiments to verify hypotheses so most study is done with past records and massive computer models. What all this means is that different scientists can look and manipulate the data as the wish. The other problem is even with the most powerful computers in the world the climate models can deal in fine enough detail to be precise. And they fail miserable trying to reproduce known climate behavior.Expand. That's not what the mainstream climate scientists say, so show me that they are wrong besides just claiming that they are. As far as deaths, as the Earth continues to get warmer, they will shift from cold exposure to heat-related. In fact, it's already happening.
Says climatologies; it's their M.O.Says who? Can you show this to be true, or are you just blowing smoke again?
Yes yes.....a giant conspiracy. LolMost of that most is a compilation of several climatology books, blo. gs and websites. The problem with climate science unlike most sciences is that it's essentially impossible to conduct experiments to verify hypotheses so most study is done with past records and massive computer models. What all this means is that different scientists can look and manipulate the data as the wish. The other problem is even with the most powerful computers in the world the climate models can deal in fine enough detail to be precise. And they fail miserable trying to reproduce known climate behavior.
You’re asking me why someone else didn’t do their due diligence? I don’t answer for them.No I am asking you.
It boils down to 2 things
1.They all got it wrong
2. They are all part of an international conspiracy
So which is it?
I will accept their scientific opinions over yoursYou’re asking me why someone else didn’t do their due diligence? I don’t answer for them.
They offered no scientific opinion on the PETM.I will accept their scientific opinions over yours
Come on dude. Lol
Climate change is going to happen regardless of what we do or don't do. Also it's not like man can't adapt to whatever happens. Early man actually lived though the trailing edge of the ice age and that's without all our modern convinces.
Nor should they.They offered no scientific opinion on the PETM.
LOL. They absolutely should be looking at hyperthermals.Nor should they.
Your claim is dismissed
According to you. What is your PhD in?LOL. They absolutely should be looking at hyperthermals.
According to science.According to you.
Knowing things.What is your PhD in?
So nothing.According to science.
Knowing things.
Most of that most is a compilation of several climatology books, blo. gs and websites. The problem with climate science unlike most sciences is that it's essentially impossible to conduct experiments to verify hypotheses so most study is done with past records and massive computer models. What all this means is that different scientists can look and manipulate the data as the wish. The other problem is even with the most powerful computers in the world the climate models can deal in fine enough detail to be precise. And they fail miserable trying to reproduce known climate behavior.
LOL. They absolutely should be looking at hyperthermals.
Says climatologies; it's their M.O.
Because hyperthermals have no known cause. You can’t rule out a cause you know nothing about.What makes you think that they're not? Do you have even the slightest idea of what you are talking about?
Because hyperthermals have no known cause. You can’t rule out a cause you know nothing about.
Translation: you need ad hominems because you don’t understand the topic.It is quite clear that you haven't the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Congrats for being able to parrot a talking point that you heard somewhere along the way.
Translation: you need ad hominems because you don’t understand the topic.