Five Small Problems with AGW science.
in [Physics]
|
From: Chris L Peterson on 2 Mar 2010 20:26 On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 19:14:42 -0600, "[SMF]" <snbsmf(a)yahooligo.com> wrote: >I'm sure the Brits will hate having the opportunity to grow >grapes again. Well, since there may be no worldwide distribution infrastructure, and most societies will have collapsed, I'm sure the ability to locally grow something will be very beneficial to the poor folks trying to scrape out an existence. Assuming that local warlords don't demand the crops as tribute; that would be pretty consistent with human behavior in times of disorder. _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com
From: yourmommycalledandsaidbehave on 2 Mar 2010 21:06
On Feb 19, 10:35 pm, "I M @ good guy" <I...(a)good.guy> wrote: > On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 21:15:27 -0600, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > >On 2/19/10 6:56 PM, Marvin the Martian wrote: > >> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:24:17 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: > > >>> NATURE: Setting the climate record straight > > >>> A co-chair of the IPCC's beleaguered second working group discusses > >>> recent criticisms > > >>>http://cl.exct.net/? > >> qs=926acdd1e8d6491ea2e8fb55d81badb5354e09a09f6cce5b381c56c97d6a7584 > > >>> The IPCC is not like a political party with a manifesto that it's > >>> preaching and a rapid-rebuttal office. But the IPCC will need to decide > >>> whether it is in the business of simply undertaking its five-year > >>> assessments or being the source of information and being able to > >>> respond, on an ongoing basis, to enquiries. > > >> Is this a "free association moment" for you, Wormley? The issue was > >> comparison between Venus and Earth and using that to PROVE that ... what? > >> AGW is caused by CO2? I pointed out how absurd that is, as Venus (and > >> even my planet, the now frozen rock Mars) has much more CO2 than Earth.. > > > It doesn't much matter what the thread title is, Marvin--You are > > attempting to disparage the science of climatology without scientific > > justification. This behavior of the "teapot types" was discussed this > > afternoon on NPR's Talk of The Nation Science Friday. > > > Why are the likes of you so vehemently railing against thousands of > > climatologist around the world, representing tens of thousands man- > > years studying the changes is weather over long periods of time. > > Long before there was an IPCC. > > You are really silly, and so is governments and > schools if there are thousands of climatologists, > ten should be enough, good meteorologists are > needed, not climatologists. > > > Furthermore, the great quantity of research data spanning many > > decades is rather overwhelming--The earth is warming at rates not > > accounted for by natural causes. We humans continue to pour copious > > quantities of CO2 into the environment and it is driving climate > > change. > > Speculation at best, BS otherwise, > messages still get deleted. > > > Most every thread you have comment in (usually you just attack > > posters, organizations and data sources without scientific scrutiny) > > is easily rebutted by the issues referred to in this document: > > >http://www.swissre.com/resources/2225fb0040c36b1fa49cbfb02e99dba1-Fac... > > > There are not enough sensors on other planets to explain what is > > happening right here right now. > > > Look at the observables, Marvin! > > We need a good laugh, explain how > Global Warming causes cold and snow again. Ah Yes all that cold and snow. so cold that the temperature in Vancouver was 10 deg above average in February and so snowy that that had to truck in snow for the olympics. Oh cold you mean when Alaska breaks the old record for high temperatures for January and February. Give it a rest. Sit down with a basic climatology book before you prove beyond a shadow you are dumber than a third grader |