• 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!

Students around the world go on strike protesting climate change

Threegoofs said:
What?

The models and predictions have been strikingly accurate.

Back in 1988, the projection was for increasingly warmer temps, especially in the arctic, higher CO2 levels, melting sea ice in the arctic, glacial retreat worldwide, etc etc.

Deniers at the time repeatedly called this untrue and issued lots of predictions of ‘cooling’, and some deniers are doing this even today.

Yet the temps steadily increase.

The models pretty much nailed it
Click to expand...

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Do Models Run Hot Or Not? A Process Control View[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest post by Kevin Kilty Introduction This short essay was prompted by a recent article regarding improvements to uncertainty in a global mean temperature estimate.[1] However, much bandwidth has been spilt lately in the related topic of error propagation [2, 3, 4], and so a small portion of this essay in its concluding remarks is…
[/FONT]
3 days ago September 21, 2019 in Climate Models.
 
Threegoofs said:
What?

The models and predictions have been strikingly accurate.

Back in 1988, the projection was for increasingly warmer temps, especially in the arctic, higher CO2 levels, melting sea ice in the arctic, glacial retreat worldwide, etc etc.

Deniers at the time repeatedly called this untrue and issued lots of predictions of ‘cooling’, and some deniers are doing this even today.

Yet the temps steadily increase.

The models pretty much nailed it
Click to expand...

Agreed. Some may have even underestimated the increase in temps
 
cabse5 said:
Let me get this straight. The reason CO2 is considered more 'heinous' to water vapor is because CO2 lasts longer in it's current heat-trapping form than water vapor? Even though there's approximately 95 percent more water vapor in the 'sphere than CO2?
Click to expand...

Yes.


Have scientists considered water vapor is constantly moving from liquid to gas? Have you noticed the change in temperature and humidity after a rain?
Click to expand...

Yes and yes.

I thought there was a climate change crisis upon us...Scientists have proven there isn't a climate change crisis when they don't consider water vapor as a enemy of climate change. Why should I bother?
Click to expand...

Because you really need to learn more about the subject. It's hard to offer a course on it on an internet chat site.
 
Jack Hays said:
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Do Models Run Hot Or Not? A Process Control View[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest post by Kevin Kilty Introduction This short essay was prompted by a recent article regarding improvements to uncertainty in a global mean temperature estimate.[1] However, much bandwidth has been spilt lately in the related topic of error propagation [2, 3, 4], and so a small portion of this essay in its concluding remarks is…
[/FONT]
3 days ago September 21, 2019 in Climate Models.
Click to expand...

Ohlookablog

Guest posted by.., some unqualified guy.
 
Threegoofs said:
No- it’s an accurate representation.

Does the guy have any expertise in climate models?
Click to expand...

This is his listing in the NASA Science Mission Directory. Dr. Kilty is a Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Wyoming. He is reported to have background in physics and geophysics. His post is credible.

[h=3]Profile :: Kevin Kilty - SMD Education
[/h]
[url]https://smdepo.org › user
[/URL]



Kevin Kilty. Track Posts. Kevin Kilty. Contact Information. Institution: Organization:Mechanical Engineering, University of Wyoming. Phone Number: 307-766- ...
 
Jack Hays said:
This is his listing in the NASA Science Mission Directory. Dr. Kilty is a Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Wyoming. He is reported to have background in physics and geophysics. His post is credible.

[h=3]Profile :: Kevin Kilty - SMD Education
[/h]
[url]https://smdepo.org › user
[/URL]



Kevin Kilty. Track Posts. Kevin Kilty. Contact Information. Institution: Organization:Mechanical Engineering, University of Wyoming. Phone Number: 307-766- ...
Click to expand...

He’s an engineer. He’s an ADJUNCT professor teaching a full load. That cries ‘failed engineer’ to me.

Does nothing with climate, and definitely nothing with climate modeling.

It’s like asking a dentist about heart transplant techniques. You’d be whining ‘but he’s a doctor!’ LOL
 
Threegoofs said:
He’s an engineer. He’s an ADJUNCT professor teaching a full load. That cries ‘failed engineer’ to me.

Does nothing with climate, and definitely nothing with climate modeling.

It’s like asking a dentist about heart transplant techniques. You’d be whining ‘but he’s a doctor!’ LOL
Click to expand...

I suppose you'll do anything to dodge the substance of the discussion. That is why you and your allies are routinely ineffective in this forum.
 
Jack Hays said:
I suppose you'll do anything to dodge the substance of the discussion. That is why you and your allies are routinely ineffective in this forum.
Click to expand...

The substance here is that your side is so desperate for denier ammo, they’ll publish anything they can get no matter how pitifully inexperienced/biased/compromised the author is.

And you defend it until it becomes obvious, and then whine about ‘substance’ when you are called out.
 
Threegoofs said:
The substance here is that your side is so desperate for denier ammo, they’ll publish anything they can get no matter how pitifully inexperienced/biased/compromised the author is.

And you defend it until it becomes obvious, and then whine about ‘substance’ when you are called out.
Click to expand...

The only things that are obvious are that the critique is sound and you fear the data.
 
Experts
f49d1fc0bd13ba343b0e6968b8e10b34.jpg


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Jack Hays said:
The only things that are obvious are that the critique is sound and you fear the data.
Click to expand...

I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t know a sound critique if it hit you in the head.

Your basis for what ‘good‘ is seems to be dependent upon how closely it conforms to denier goals.

Sad.
 
Threegoofs said:
I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t know a sound critique if it hit you in the head.

Your basis for what ‘good‘ is seems to be dependent upon how closely it conforms to denier goals.

Sad.
Click to expand...

Your arrogance is unearned, and your prejudice is your prison.
 
Threegoofs said:
Your gullibility is spectacular.
Click to expand...

"When a thing's credentials look most plausible, lay it bare, observe its triviality, and strip it of the cloak of verbiage that dignifies it. Pretentiousness is the arch deceiver, and never more delusive than when you imagine your work is most meritorious." --Marcus Aurelius, The Meditations
 
Eriech said:
Experts
f49d1fc0bd13ba343b0e6968b8e10b34.jpg


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Greta has near the same education as the founder of Watts Up with That - the denier spokesperson for climate change. Forget all those phD Climatologists, the High Schooler, Watts has spoken.
 
Threegoofs said:
(Narrator: cabse had never read a science textbook before, and was not genuinely curious)
Click to expand...

This isn't true. I took a college class on environmental science (and read the class science textbook) back in 2007 realizing there were holes in the logic of their 'scientific' theory back then.
 
cabse5 said:
This isn't true. I took a college class on environmental science (and read the class science textbook) back in 2007 realizing there were holes in the logic of their 'scientific' theory back then.
Click to expand...

You read a book 12 years ago????


Well that settles it then. Lol
 
ataraxia said:
What training, background, or experience do you have in that field to question or dismiss the overwhelming consensus of the experts on their profession?

If 9 out of 10 doctors tell you you have a serious problem which needs surgery, do you feel this confident in dismissing them? Just dismiss them by saying they must just want to make money off of you?
Click to expand...

If every prognosticator and statistician said Hillary was going to win the 2016 election....Yes, I apologize 'cause that had to of hurt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom