Lockjaw Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 If I'd meant to put more likely I would have, you are supposed to be the intelligent one you should know the difference between likely and chance, or are you just being awkward for awkward's sake and point scoring. Having already seen the results of the coolists and no ice age as yet, and the warmists no warming for the last 15? years, the coolists have it by a whisker, and looking out the back door I don't see a great deal of warm. Apart from that, where are all these accurate global temperature records other than guesswork and trying to make models fit the bill, depending on who fiddles them. Nope, sorry, you're not convincing me of anything here, retep. Just looks like a load of disjointed drivel to complement your contradictory statements above. I draw my educated conclusions probably from the same sources as you, only I apply a bit of common sense. Ah, good old common sense. There are uninformed, reactionary buffoons on both sides of the argument claiming to be applying common sense on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Nope, sorry, you're not convincing me of anything here, retep. Just looks like a load of disjointed drivel to complement your contradictory statements above. Ah, good old common sense. There are uninformed, reactionary buffoons on both sides of the argument claiming to be applying common sense on this thread. You've never convinced me of anything, so I suppose that makes us even. Nice that you recognise your failings. Bravo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 What are these simple facts you speak of and are there any peer reviewed published studies to back them up. All I've seen from the conspiracy theorists are half baked ideas that because it was warmer in the past, humans can’t be making it warmer now. The argument you're supporting is that because it's getting warmer, and we have produced CO2, it must be humans that have made it warmer. The 'conspiracy' theory being the counter that it got warmer in the past without human intervention, and CO2 levels have been higher naturally without having increased the temperature. I suppose the conspiracy theory is that AGW is the conspiracy. Or at least it's bad science that is promulgated for financial reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 I suppose the conspiracy theory is that AGW is the conspiracy. If its not AGW, what is causing it? There is no credible alternative view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 If its not AGW, what is causing it? There is no credible alternative view. This is their problem, they have no other theory, they can't even use the sun as an excuse because it’s going into a solar minimum, they use the past as an excuse for not supporting the evidence, without fully understanding it. All they can come up with is something we don’t know about, can’t see and can’t measure is cause the warming and the increases in CO2, sounds to me like they think God must be responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Grindley Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Do we? If you want to understand climate change, then you will search for, and try to understand what you see. I think I am quiet well read on the subject and whilst I do not argue about the various absorbsion spectrums of air with and without greater or lesser CO2 levels I can understand the conclusions of those experts who do such things. They (the Royal society for instance) quote a figure of 3.2 Watts per square metre for a doubling of CO2 in the air. I well understand this, and how it can change the basics of climate modeling. Do you know better than the IPCC? Have you anything which implies that their predictions are on the low side? Especially as their predictions have been 100% on the very high side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 This is their problem, they have no other theory, they can't even use the sun as an excuse because it’s going into a solar minimum, they use the past as an excuse for not supporting the evidence, without fully understanding it. All they can come up with is something we don’t know about, can’t see and can’t measure is cause the warming and the increases in CO2, sounds to me like they think God must be responsible. Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warming "Unlike warming, cooling really is dangerous, regularly dropping the planet into hundred-thousand-year-long glacial periods.” NASA has said that there is evidence that the most recent “Little Ice Age” was caused by a dip in solar activity. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/02/01/report-show-un-admitting-solar-activity-may-play-significant-role-in-global/#ixzz2OMfttUP1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warming /QUOTE] The focus on solar activity distracts from the big picture -- the fact that the Earth has been warming since 1900. To back that up, Huertas points to data that show that solar activity and temperature rose together from 1880 until 1960, but that then, solar activity stopped increasing -- even as temperatures continued going up. “The basic evidence is that solar activity has varied a bit while global temperature keeps going up,” Huertas said. But Rawls said that while solar activity has indeed stopped increasing, the important thing is that it remains at a historically high level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Report shows UN admitting solar activity may play significant role in global warming "Unlike warming, cooling really is dangerous, regularly dropping the planet into hundred-thousand-year-long glacial periods.” NASA has said that there is evidence that the most recent “Little Ice Age” was caused by a dip in solar activity. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/02/01/report-show-un-admitting-solar-activity-may-play-significant-role-in-global/#ixzz2OMfttUP1 That backs up what I’ve been saying, not sure why it takes a study to conclude that the sun plays a role in climate change, it’s as obvious as we get light from the sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 If its not AGW, what is causing it? There is no credible alternative view. If CO2 is the only driver in warming then where did it come from to create the warming seen in the medieval period? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now