- Joined
- Jul 17, 2020
- Messages
- 47,360
- Reaction score
- 26,051
- Location
- Springfield MO
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Lame excuse.
From a political office? I went to several links. It only links to the main page. Not what they say. Too much meaningless, political information.
How about some science please? Politics does not belong in science.
Maybe you would like to compile a list of scientists who are willing to speak on camera for the agenda?Hey guys look what I found on youtube!!!!!!
Hahahahaha
Oh good you found the references. I knew you could do itI haven't found this yet. Too bad you rarely ever verify the material you link.
This I found in the WG1 Full Report, reference 15. In full context:
Understanding of the fundamental features of the climate system is robust and well established.Scientists in the 19th-century identified the major natural factors influencing the climate system. They alsohypothesized the potential for anthropogenic climate change due to carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted by fossilfuel combustion. The principal natural drivers of climate change, including changes in incoming solarradiation, volcanic activity, orbital cycles, and changes in global biogeochemical cycles, have been studiedsystematically since the early 20th century. Other major anthropogenic drivers, such as atmospheric aerosols(fine solid particles or liquid droplets), land-use change and non-CO2 greenhouse gases, were identified bythe 1970s. Since systematic scientific assessments began in the 1970s, the influence of human activity on thewarming of the climate system has evolved from theory to established fact. Past projections of global surfacetemperature and the pattern of warming are broadly consistent with subsequent observations (limitedevidence, high agreement), especially when accounting for the difference in radiative forcing scenarios usedfor making projections and the radiative forcings that actually occurred.
All this does is correctly acknowledge we have an effect. Please note. It says it isn't ready. Have you seen a fully released final version yet? I haven't looked yet to see if its available, but they also caution people not to quote it.
Final Government Distribution Chapter 1 IPCC AR6 WGI
Do Not Cite, Quote or Distribute
You really should verify any information you link when it comes from bloggers. They often misconstrue or flat out lie.
I will post again when I do or do not find the first sentence, but so far it appears to be made up by the bloggers. maybe you care to find it?
Should I look on YouTube? LolMaybe you would like to compile a list of scientists who are willing to speak on camera for the agenda?
Oh look. A meme. Lol
Sure, once you gave the location that you failed to do before. Still haven't found the first sentence.Oh good you found the references. I knew you could do it
Maybe you would like to compile a list of scientists who are willing to speak on camera for the agenda?
Keep looking. You can do it!!!!!!Sure, once you gave the location that you failed to do before. Still haven't found the first sentence.
Yes, but that is meaningless to claim the agree, when there is no link to their agreement statement. Especially when the list is put out by a government body.Those are scientific organizations
At least what has been posted by Neil are scientists speaking out against what other scientists are said to say, who do not speak on the topic, but just write papers that are misconstrued by the public.
It's a conspiracy!!!!!!!! LolYes, but that is meaningless to claim the agree, when there is no link to their agreement statement. Especially when the list is put out by a government body.
Lame excuse.
I'm sorry you guys believe that is good debating techniques. Seems like bantering rather than debate. Have anything of value to add, instead of personal attacks?It's a conspiracy!!!!!!!! Lol
Okay dokey pokeyI'm sorry you guys believe that is good debating techniques. Seems like bantering rather than debate. Have anything of value to add, instead of personal attacks?
I am now downloading the WGII full report. Dam their site is slow. I still have 15 minutes to go.
I suggest you guys add this to your computer as well for reference. That way, you can verify if one of your favorite bloggers is lying or not before you repeat what they say.
Keep at it!!!!!LOL. The report failed to download. I started over, and its back to 18 minutes at the slow rate I'm getting it. You would think with all the money the IPCC has to spend, they could use better servers.
I did and gave up. The failure is at their end. I checked my system, cleared my download file, rebooted, and other things.Keep at it!!!!!
OK buddy. LolI did and gave up. The failure is at their end. I checked my system, cleared my download file, rebooted, and other things.
Have you downloaded it?
I have over $4k into my system. I had over 200 GB free space on my 1 TB SSD before I started. This is however, the first time I deleted my download folder in years.
My downloads have always been slow from the IPCC.
Please download it yourself. It's only 3,068 pages and 388 MB.
It's not funny. You thinking it is, shows you don't really care.OK buddy. Lol
I think it's hilariousIt's not funny. You thinking it is, shows you don't really care.
I cannot verify your post, and it seems you refuse to.
I suggest you find the reference and prove your point is valid, since it came from a blog that often lies and misdirects.
You can concede your point if you wish not to provide the original source material. Your choice.
I am actually laughing right nowScience is funny to you?
OK...
Too bad you trust in blogs over the real values of the scientific process.I am actually laughing right now
YouTube!!!!!!Too bad you trust in blogs over the real values of the scientific process.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?