Wildcat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Talk about blurring. Eh? You made the statement: Not proxies etc. ... temperature. .. and went on to confirm that you knew this for a fact. Indeed I did, and it is a scientific fact. It is shown to be correct by the models, the consensus of scientific opinion accepts it, and the greenhouse effect is the only explanation that fits the evidence, in particular of the Stratosphere cooling at the same time as the troposphere is warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Indeed, if the climate does change it's going to be quite difficult to figure out whether we had anything to do with it or not. If the AGW supporters get there way, and we cut CO2, and it still changes, I suppose that will prove them wrong though, after we've wasted trillions of pounds. The evidence is clear that it is us that is the causing recent increase in temperature. If we cut CO2 temperatures will still change. What can falsify the theory is a better one that fits the facts more accurately that doesn't include the greenhouse effect. So far the most accurate models include the greenhouse effect, what seems much more likely is that the theories and models on which they are based will be fine tuned, not that they will be lost all together, rather like the way newtonian mechanics have been refined by subsequent theories like relativity and quantum mechanics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 The evidence is far from clear, a lot of it seems to have simply been fabricated. The models predictions can't even accurately model the past, never mind predict anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Indeed I did, and it is a scientific fact. .............. So put up your £5,000 then, instead of blurring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 So put up your £5,000 then, instead of blurring. Why wait 20 years? there is already sufficient evidence to win the bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 The evidence is far from clear, a lot of it seems to have simply been fabricated. The models predictions can't even accurately model the past, never mind predict anything. Because Global Historical Climate Network, the US. Historical Climate Network, World Monthly Surface Station Climatology, Antarctic weather stations, European weather stations, the Italian Meterological Society, Satellite feeds from AMSU, SORCE, NASA, Proudman Oceanographic Lab, the World Glacier Monitoring Service, Argo float data, International Comprehensive Ocean/Atmosphere Data Set (ICOADS), AERONET are well known for fabricating data... just like NASA fabricated the moon-landing. The model predictions appear to be doing rather well: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/12/updates-to-model-data-comparisons/#more-1810 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibn Batotah Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Excuse me - this is something I have been watching for months, maybe years (not only on this forum thread) I still like to refer people to the "precession of the Equinox" (google it) where the main axis of the earth "wobbles" through 1 to 2 degrees over a period of 25,000 years. It isn't an earthquake - I can tell you as I have experienced several ....... if this is happening and looking at the time frame and considering recorded history of mankind ?????? (it may have been mentioned already) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Excuse me - this is something I have been watching for months, maybe years (not only on this forum thread) I still like to refer people to the "precession of the Equinox" (google it) where the main axis of the earth "wobbles" through 1 to 2 degrees over a period of 25,000 years. It isn't an earthquake - I can tell you as I have experienced several ....... if this is happening and looking at the time frame and considering recorded history of mankind ?????? (it may have been mentioned already) Despite the question marks, I am not sure what your question is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Even the theory of the correlation between climate change and number of pirates shown here: http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/ convincing though it appears, doesn't explain the cooling in the stratosphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibn Batotah Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Despite the question marks, I am not sure what your question is? the question marks refer to the credability of other certain people and/or organisations that are trying to make claims about global warming. Some individuals have actually gone on to win prestigious awards without actually evaluating ALL the facts. These same individuals, when questioned, have never even heard of the "Precession of the equinox" and answered saying they thought they were a hard rock band. (BTW - I was the one asking the question!) 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