Man-made global warming is a lie and not backed up by science, claims leading meteorologist.
- Thread starter jahbrudda
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Answer this, is climate a casual function or not? Can it be used to predict instantaneous weather?
Who's arguing you aren't correct besides paddy?
sheskunk
Well-Known Member
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
I'm not familiar with the term "casual function" please explain.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
Your incorrect spelling and the way you phrased the question threw me off.
If you are asking me if climate is a causal system or that there is causality between man caused co2 and temperature, my answer is, no.
I believe there is a causality between co2 and temperature but it's looking like co2 lags temperature.
sheskunk
Well-Known Member
There is a lot of dry land. If the oceans rose 10 feet we'd all still be fine. People would simply have to move inland a little. New ports would be opened, new lakes and rivers would be formed. New growing land would be developed. It gets up to 110+ where I live in the summer. I'm fine. I think this is all a bunch of nonsense. It's a debate over who is right and wrong. Nobody really cares about the climate.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
I fully agree.
My main argument is that there is proof that our climate has changed throughout history, way before man set foot on this planet. The idea that the government can change this by legislation is downright idiocy.
Yeah, in general I’m a terrible speller and the problem is exacerbated when I don’t proof read.
Causal in the mathematical sense; I’m curious about your definition re the difference in the two discussed terms; hence the questions. Some of your comments just struck me as odd; specifically in your use of “time”. Are you talking about the sampled time interval or the record length?
Btw, you don’t have to give your answer in terms of climate change; that’s not what I’m asking about.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
NASA would disagree, but that's probably all part of the george soros conspiracy and they don't know as much as a smart guy like you.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
neh, maybe it's the fact I don't trust the government and politicians like some of you loons do.
Even NASA itself admits 95% of their climate models were wrong, you can hang your hat on the 5%, I won't.
Here is the head of NASA in 1988 predicting a 1.9 degree celsius rise in temperature, needless to say, he was way off.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
care to put down the meth pipe for a second and cite that claim for me, beenthere?
care to tell me which denier website you got your falsified graph from?Here is the head of NASA in 1988 predicting a 1.9 degree celsius rise in temperature, needless to say, he was way off.
because here is hansen's 1988 predictions.
and here is hanen's 1981 prediction:
for the record, beenthere, hansen never predicted a 1.9 degree celsius increase. as you can see, that projection is based on levels of CO2 that are higher than the levels of CO2 that have actually been created.
scenario B most closely matches the levels of CO2 that have been created, and the 25 year old projection has been about as accurate as you could get.
but feel free to tell some more lies while providing no citation for your own ridiculous claims and obviously falsified, unattributed graphs, washere.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
You supply a graph with the wrong prediction from the alarmist website skeptical science LOLcare to put down the meth pipe for a second and cite that claim for me, beenthere?
care to tell me which denier website you got your falsified graph from?
because here is hansen's 1988 predictions.
and here is hanen's 1981 prediction:
for the record, beenthere, hansen never predicted a 1.9 degree celsius increase. as you can see, that projection is based on levels of CO2 that are higher than the levels of CO2 that have actually been created.
scenario B most closely matches the levels of CO2 that have been created, and the 25 year old projection has been about as accurate as you could get.
but feel free to tell some more lies while providing no citation for your own ridiculous claims and obviously falsified, unattributed graphs, washere.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
again, hansen's own chart shows that projection is based on CO2 levels that are higher than the CO2 levels we've put off.
are you fucking retarded?