User Tag List

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 37

Thread: Non-science of global warming....

  1. #1
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteranRecommendation Second ClassTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 46.0%

    patrickt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Oaxaca, Mexico, for over twenty years. Born and raised in Memphis, TN, and worked in Colorado.
    Posts
    29,022
    Thanks
    3,609
    Thanked: 17,370
    Rep Power
    21474873

    Non-science of global warming....

    "If you follow closely the subject of hypothesized human-caused global warming, you probably regularly experience, as I do, a strong sense of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, you read dozens of pieces from seemingly authoritative media sources, as well as from important political officeholders, declaring that the causal relationship between human CO2 emissions and rapidly rising global temperatures is definitive….On the other hand, you studied the scientific method back in high school, and you can’t help asking yourself the basic questions that that method entails:"
    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...al-warming.php

    Interesting article and I'm not a science guy like Mr. Nye.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to patrickt For This Useful Post:

    Fall River (07-23-2019)

  3. #2
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteranTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Taxcutter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    20,726
    Thanks
    92
    Thanked: 17,697
    Rep Power
    21474864
    Their models don't give alarmist results unless they doctor the data.

    Science based on falsified data is junk science.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Taxcutter For This Useful Post:

    riderboy (08-26-2019),teeceetx (07-23-2019)

  5. #3
    V.I.P V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Overall activity: 12.0%

    Old Tex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,345
    Thanks
    2,911
    Thanked: 15,074
    Rep Power
    21474852
    On the one hand there was a time where the earth was getting warmer. On the other two hands our climate has always gone up & down in cycles. And the 2nd hand? The fact that it became a political agenda & was blown out of proportion for votes. And the funny part is by the time they made it an issue, the earth was in a different cycle & was actually cooling down. (That's from a real climate scientist, not someone that just has a degree).

  6. #4
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteranRecommendation Second ClassTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 46.0%

    patrickt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Oaxaca, Mexico, for over twenty years. Born and raised in Memphis, TN, and worked in Colorado.
    Posts
    29,022
    Thanks
    3,609
    Thanked: 17,370
    Rep Power
    21474873
    Quote Originally Posted by Taxcutter View Post
    Their models don't give alarmist results unless they doctor the data.

    Science based on falsified data is junk science.
    Another clue to junk science is when the "scientists" refuse to share the data with the community of scientists.

  7. #5
    Senior Member Forum Donor Achievements:
    50000 Experience Points3 months registeredSocialTagger Second Class
    Overall activity: 36.0%

    Call_me_Ishmael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,439
    Thanks
    226
    Thanked: 1,510
    Rep Power
    3323002
    Bill Nye is a tinkerer. Not very bright. Ever see his proof that CO2 is causing warming? He places a 100 watt heat lamp over fishbowls filled with CO2 and regular air. The one with CO2 gets warmer. He apparently thinks that's QED. For people without science and engineering degrees it apparently is.
    Orange man MAGA
    Orange man strong

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Call_me_Ishmael For This Useful Post:

    notofimport36 (08-21-2019)

  9. #6
    Senior Member Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocial3 months registeredYour first Group
    Overall activity: 17.0%

    Physics Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    680
    Thanks
    290
    Thanked: 730
    Rep Power
    3221239
    Global cooling, AGW, Climate Change, Peak Oil, ...

    The solution is always global governance, tyrannical unaccountable bureaucracies, and turning the first world into the third.

    Like the Brits sometimes say, Enviros are watermelons, Green on the outside and (commie) Red on the inside.
    Scientist, Evangelical Christian - reformed, father, entrepreneur, hunter, outdoorsman, motorcyclist, Constitutional Conservative.

  10. #7
    Senior Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Overall activity: 0%

    freethinker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    228
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked: 75
    Rep Power
    429501
    [QUOTE=patrickt;2203686]"If you follow closely the subject of hypothesized human-caused global warming, you probably regularly experience, as I do, a strong sense of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, you read dozens of pieces from seemingly authoritative media sources, as well as from important political officeholders, declaring that the causal relationship between human CO2 emissions and rapidly rising global temperatures is definitive….On the other hand, you studied the scientific method back in high school, and you can’t help asking yourself the basic questions that that method entails:"
    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...al-warming.php

    Interesting article and I'm not a science guy like Mr. Nye.

    This is about a study that found a strong correlation between low cloud cover and the mean global (land and ocean) temperature anomaly from 1983 to 2009. Correlation does not prove causation. Other peer-reviewed studies of low cloud cover don't agree with the graph presented by Povrovsky and Kauppinen. Povrovsky used satellite data and processed that through a model to arrive at the graph. There is no discussion in this study of the mechanism of a natural reduction in low cloud cover or errors and uncertainties in the model. Peer-reviewed science supports the conclusion that rising temperature is the
    cause of a reduction in low cloud cover. There are many factors that influence climate in addition to low cloud cover, like middle cloud cover, high cloud cover, greenhouse gas concentrations, aerosols, changes in solar irradiance, changes in ocean circulation, and other factors. Just performing a correlation study like this is and ignoring all factors that influence the climate is shoddy science.

    This article is essentially the same science as presented in the 6 page paper by J. Kauppinen and P. Malmi titles, "No Experimental Evidence For The Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change". It has not
    been peer-reviewed and won't likely ever be accepted by a reputable publisher. The article makes a number of ridiculous claims including that the oceans are the source of increased atmospheric carbon
    dioxide and that the climate sensitivity is an order of magnitude smaller than what is generally accepted. I read the 6 page paper and the rebuttals by climate scientists at climatefeedback.org.

  11. #8
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsVeteranTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 44.0%

    nonsqtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    25,013
    Thanks
    9,012
    Thanked: 24,476
    Rep Power
    21474867
    Quote Originally Posted by patrickt View Post
    "If you follow closely the subject of hypothesized human-caused global warming, you probably regularly experience, as I do, a strong sense of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, you read dozens of pieces from seemingly authoritative media sources, as well as from important political officeholders, declaring that the causal relationship between human CO2 emissions and rapidly rising global temperatures is definitive….On the other hand, you studied the scientific method back in high school, and you can’t help asking yourself the basic questions that that method entails:"
    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...al-warming.php

    Interesting article and I'm not a science guy like Mr. Nye.
    The latest piece of propaganda is the "heat index".

    The news stations are no longer reporting temperatures, have you noticed that?

    They're reporting the "heat index" instead.

    No one knows what that is exactly, except it's always a few degrees higher than the actual temperature. It's supposed to be a "feels like" temperature, in other words it's entirely subjective.

    But this is the kind of propaganda the Liberals come up with to justify their bullshit. They want to create a new reality, they use this crap to say see, the temperatures have increased. This is the way they sell their snake oil to Dumbass Americans.

  12. #9
    Alumni Member Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class1 year registered
    Overall activity: 42.0%

    Morning Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    19,005
    Thanks
    6,050
    Thanked: 21,894
    Rep Power
    21474858
    The biggest hoax about climate change is the solutions they propose. Not a single one of them will change a damn thing.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Morning Star For This Useful Post:

    JustPassinThru (08-14-2019)

  14. #10
    Alumni Member & VIP V.I.P Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsCreated Blog entryVeteranRecommendation Second ClassTagger First Class
    Overall activity: 46.0%

    patrickt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Oaxaca, Mexico, for over twenty years. Born and raised in Memphis, TN, and worked in Colorado.
    Posts
    29,022
    Thanks
    3,609
    Thanked: 17,370
    Rep Power
    21474873
    Quote Originally Posted by Taxcutter View Post
    Their models don't give alarmist results unless they doctor the data.

    Science based on falsified data is junk science.
    And junk science is lucrative. I had that explained to me back in the 1950s when "doctors" said smoking was good for you.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •