• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bombshell: Koch-Funded Study Finds ‘Global Warming Is Real’

This is actually the second time this happened to the Koch brothers. A couple years ago they found a scientist who said that he thought he had evidence that some of the temperature increases was due to the measuring points being too near to cities. They gave him a million dollars to prove it. But, in the end, he concluded that it wasn't true and gave back the million dollars.
 
teamosil said:
This is actually the second time this happened to the Koch brothers. A couple years ago they found a scientist who said that he thought he had evidence that some of the temperature increases was due to the measuring points being too near to cities. They gave him a million dollars to prove it. But, in the end, he concluded that it wasn't true and gave back the million dollars.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I'd like to see that study.
 
Republic Now! said:
It's the BEST study.
Click to expand...

BEST is a big ongoing project. This is the second time they funded somebody under that project that they thought would debunk AGW who ultimately concluded that the doubts were bogus and it is in fact rock solid science. It happened in 2011 and it just happened again yesterday.

In 2011 it was Anthony Watts, this time it was Richard Muller. Two of the (formerly) leading denier scientists.
 
Last edited:
teamosil said:
BEST is a big ongoing project. This is the second time they funded somebody under that project that they thought would debunk AGW who ultimately concluded that the doubts were bogus and it is in fact rock solid science. It happened in 2011 and it just happened again yesterday.
Click to expand...

No, it's the same person and the same study. Richard Muller, as per the OP. He just "saw the light" AGAIN Saturday for some reason.
 
teamosil said:
No. In 2011 it was Anthony Watts.
Click to expand...

Anthony Watts is the person the article is making fun of, who never worked for BEST but said he would trust the results of it.

See here:

Notable skeptics like Anthony Watts have long pushed this bogus UHI theory. In fact, Watts admits that he basically became a climate skeptic when he heard that urban heat islands (UHI) had distorted the global temperature record. In November, Watts wrote on Watts Up With That: “UHI is easily observable. I’ve been telling readers about UHI since this blog started…”

Mr. Watts isn’t quitting his fight just yet, complaining yesterday on his blog that the BEST studies must first clear peer review. Fair enough, sir, but in the meantime you might want to sharpen your flatware in preparation to dine on crow.
Click to expand...

Why would he complain about his own study?
 
Republic Now! said:
Not really that much compared to modern automobiles.
Click to expand...

True, of course other forms of transportation and power plants are significant contributors are well. It was more than you might think a 100 years ago , nothing compared today though.

Global_Carbon_Emissions.svg
 
Republic Now! said:
Actually, it's more like one side tends to be callous and dismissive, believing to themselves that the other side knows nothing about the topic.
Click to expand...

You're own quotes show that he never said man was causing global warming before. I don't assume you noticed that, though.

Step One: Read
Step Two: Think
Step Three: Post

I believe you skipped the first two steps and just skipped to posting.
 
I don't know if I've ever seen this graph before:

T%20CO2%20SL%20current%20Makiko%20TIMMED.jpg


Interesting how the PPM on the CO2 shoots up at the end there, way higher than it has been for at least 400,000 years. Interesting.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
True, of course other forms of transportation and power plants are significant contributors are well. It was more than you might think a 100 years ago , nothing compared today though.

Global_Carbon_Emissions.svg
Click to expand...

Yes, which is why most arguments about global warming don't talk about that time period, since the co2 output was not all that significant.

You're own quotes show that he never said man was causing global warming before. I don't assume you noticed that, though.

Step One: Read
Step Two: Think
Step Three: Post

I believe you skipped the first two steps and just skipped to posting.
Click to expand...

Don't know what you mean. I was addressing the part I quoted.
 
Republic Now! said:
Do you believe in catastrophic climate change?
Click to expand...
It all depends on what you call 'catastrophic'. How many years do you define as 'catastrophic'? 2-3? A decade? 2-3 decades? A century? In civil engineering the "100-year flood" is the common marker for storm water design.
 
Republic Now! said:
Actually, it's more like one side tends to be callous and dismissive, believing to themselves that the other side knows nothing about the topic.
Click to expand...

I wonder why that is?!?!

The evidence for anthropogenic climate change is overwhelming, and has been for decades. Those that deny the existence on anthropogenic climate change are expecting us to believe that the majority of the world's scientific community is somehow involved in some huge evil conspiracy. How can one not be callous and dismissive of idiots like that?
 
monkeyloveafight said:
I wonder why that is?!?!

The evidence for anthropogenic climate change is overwhelming, and has been for decades. Those that deny the existence on anthropogenic climate change are expecting us to believe that the majority of the world's scientific community is somehow involved in some huge evil conspiracy. How can one not be callous and dismissive of idiots like that?
Click to expand...

One can be dismissive but remain cool. Granted, it is somewhat frustrating to be called foolish, ignorant, or wrong by someone you see as these self same things...but it seems they deserve pity, rather than Ire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom