Man-made global warming is a lie and not backed up by science, claims leading meteorologist.

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
so when one group of scientists assert X, supported by hypothesis, projections, secret data and dire predictions which have failed over and over again, they are right

but another group of scientists assert Y, and actually shows their data, they must be wrong because they are all unqualified.

and the scientific debate is solved by your shrill cries of "Deniers!", "Koch Brothers" and "Smash Capitalism!!"

i'll make a note.
The group that makes up the overwhelming majority of scientists who accept the IPCC's report on anthropogenic climate change which says that it exists, supported by decades of observations, facts, transparent data and demonstrably correct predictions which have confirmed over and over again, they are right

But another fringe group of "scientists" assert anthropogenic climate change doesn't exist, lies and manipulates data, receives bribes from the fossil fuel industry and corrupt politicians in order to advance a political agenda
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Do you think the fossil fuel industry will regulate itself?

:dunce:

Did you get that talking point from the weatherman?
But, Pad is totally not supportive of legislation based on GLOBAL WARMING, cause, like, he said so. He just wants everyone to accept the argument for the sake of our collective knowledge.
 

jahbrudda

Well-Known Member
Who knows more, a kid who just moved out of his parents house or a meteorologist who's been in the weather business for over 50 years.:lol:
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Who knows more, a kid who just moved out of his parents house or a meteorologist who's been in the weather business for over 50 years.:lol:
awww, isn't that cute.

beenthere thinks weather and climate are the same thing.

if i were you, i'd focus less on making an ass out of yourself on the internet, stop making 50,000 twitter posts about phallic symbols you enjoy putting in your mouth, and get some resolve and a steam cleaner to remove those piss stains off the carpet in your apartment.
 

heckler73

Well-Known Member

http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.6030
Solar magnetic fields and terrestrial climate
Katya Georgieva, Yury Nagovitsyn, Boian Kirov
(Submitted on 21 Nov 2014)
Solar irradiance is considered one of the main natural factors affecting terrestrial climate, and its variations are included in most numerical models estimating the effects of natural versus anthropogenic factors for climate change. Solar wind causing geomagnetic disturbances is another solar activity agent whose role in climate change is not yet fully estimated but is a subject of intense research. For the purposes of climate modeling, it is essential to evaluate both the past and the future variations of solar irradiance and geomagnetic activity which are ultimately due to the variations of solar magnetic fields. Direct measurements of solar magnetic fields are available for a limited period, but can be reconstructed from geomagnetic activity records. Here we present a reconstruction of total solar irradiance based on geomagnetic data, and a forecast of the future irradiance and geomagnetic activity relevant for the expected climate change.
Comments: Proceedings of the XVIII conference "Solar and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 2014", Pulkovo, Russia, 20-25 October 2014

I'll just cut to the chase; the Sun has been responsible for at least 1.5 K change in temp since the early 18th century, or 3.5 K since the deepest part of the Maunder minimum, according to them. There's also an interesting anomaly ;) in the IPCC's own values for TSI over the last century, which creates reason for pause in thought about their motives.

Care for some more ICE in your cube?
Antarctica's ice paradox has yet another puzzling layer. Not only is the amount of sea ice increasing each year, but an underwater robot now shows the ice is also much thicker than was previously thought, a new study reports.
http://www.livescience.com/48880-antarctica-sea-ice-thickness-mapped.html


How to grow a Polar Bear:
Step One
Plant polar bear seedling in snow...



Step Two
Wait until "34 National Science Academies" say the Polar Bear population is allowed to grow because Hansen 1988 model CO2 consensus IPCC Hottest Hot NASA Heat SCIENCE!!!@@!!11

Step Three
Al Gore and repeat.

Step Four

Step Five

Collect Diploma of Climate Science

 

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
READ FULL ARTICLE HERE ====>>> http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22429974.000-geoengineering-the-planet-first-experiments-take-shape.html#.VHaavWcveSo

Geoengineering the planet: first experiments take shape

Proposals for the first trials to cool the planet include cloud brightening and spraying aerosols into the ozone layer. They might start in just two years

IF WE can't reduce emissions enough, what else can cool the planet? We need to find out if geoengineering works, and soon, say a group of atmospheric scientists.

Engineering the planet's weather and climate is a highly controversial idea. That's why we need experiments, the group say, and they want the first to start in two years' time. The frontrunners are schemes to alter the atmosphere to reflect more of the sun's rays back into space, or to change clouds so that they let more of Earth's heat out instead of trapping it (see diagrams).

Last week, the group published a "road map" of proposals for how real-world experiments might be carried out (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, doi.org/xb9).

One would explore the effects of injecting aerosols of sea salt into marine clouds. The aim is to increase the water droplet content of the clouds, making them reflect more sunlight – so called marine cloud brightening.

The second, and most detailed, devised by John Dykema of Harvard University, would explore the effects of injecting sulphur-containing substances at an altitude of 20 kilometres – the lower reaches of the boundary with outer space (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, doi.org/xb8).



The aim of the so-called stratospheric controlled perturbation experiment, or SCoPEx, is to see if sulphate ions would undermine measures to rebuild the ozone layer. The fear is that such substances might set off chemical reactions that deplete the ozone.

The third experiment would explore the potential for making cirrus clouds in the upper atmosphere more porous to radiation bouncing back into space from Earth. Water vapour in the clouds behaves like a greenhouse gas, trapping heat almost as efficiently as carbon dioxide. By seeding them with substances like bismuth tri-iodide, which cause water to form into ice particles, the hope is to reduce the water vapour and allow more radiation to escape.

Geoengineering to cool the planet by deliberately altering Earth's atmosphere is highly controversial, with sceptics fearing it will fail and mess up the climate even more. Altering cloud cover, for example, could change rainfall patterns and increase droughts and floods unpredictably. Opponents also fear that if we rely on geoengineering solutions, people will no longer strive towards the main goal of dramatically reducing our reliance on the fossil fuels that are inexorably heating up the planet.
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
The group that makes up the overwhelming majority of scientists who accept the IPCC's report on anthropogenic climate change which says that it exists, supported by decades of observations, facts, transparent data and demonstrably correct predictions which have confirmed over and over again, they are right

But another fringe group of "scientists" assert anthropogenic climate change doesn't exist, lies and manipulates data, receives bribes from the fossil fuel industry and corrupt politicians in order to advance a political agenda
you forgot to include the important preface to your screed, "In Your Opinion..."

the discredited claims of oreskes and cook do not represent "scientific consensus", the IPCC has been backpedaling like a motherfucker on their claims, and you have demonstrated a distinct ignorance of what a "theory" is, as well as the nature of "facts".

claiming that those actual scientists who disagree with your polemic are "fringe" is poppycock.

the whole "theory" of "anthropogenic climate change" and "global warming" is based on some very tenuous hypotheses, and the data has been so callously manipulated by its proponents, that the entire theory looks like a house of cards.

but you believe it, so everybody else has to as well, or they are just stupid.

281927_367195640023259_386703428_n.jpg
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
HAARP is real. I witness it here almost every day.


View attachment 3301716
i clearly recall cloud formations like that when i was a lad, long before HAARP was built.

what made altostratus clouds in the 1970's and 80's?

leprechauns?

unicorn farts?

geoengineering in the 1800's by evil super scientists from their dirigible sky-lairs?

heres a scholarly work on those very types of cloud formations from 1977, some 16 years before the building of HAARP

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0450(1977)016<0339:LOOAMP>2.0.CO;2
 
Top