New report on climate change released today

[Elixir]

The GW-enhanced temperature gradient is what produces storms, as well as the irregular jetstream pattern that has delivered arctic air to the midwest.
I think he knows that, but cannot resist taking a pretend-ignorant jab at people who support the Bogus science.

There, I fixed it for you!

May have fixed your own cognitive dissonance, but adding an inapplicable adjective is hardly "fixing" anything.
Bilby explains it to you above... read and learn!

 

[angelo]

The GW-enhanced temperature gradient is what produces storms, as well as the irregular jetstream pattern that has delivered arctic air to the midwest.
I think he knows that, but cannot resist taking a pretend-ignorant jab at people who support the Bogus science.

There, I fixed it for you!

May have fixed your own cognitive dissonance, but adding an inapplicable adjective is hardly "fixing" anything.
Bilby explains it to you above... read and learn!

I beg you pardon. I had no idea Bilby is a world renown geophysicist!

 

[Elixir]

May have fixed your own cognitive dissonance, but adding an inapplicable adjective is hardly "fixing" anything.
Bilby explains it to you above... read and learn!

I beg you pardon. I had no idea Bilby is a world renown geophysicist!

Did I say he was?
Here are some world renowned geophysicists (as renowned as geophysicists get), saying what Bilby said:

Why Global Warming Can Mean Harsher Winter Weather

Read it and weep.

In the upper level, a distinctive anticyclone located over Alaska shows an equivalent barotropic structure (Fig. 1b). In addition, cyclonic and anticyclonic anomalies are located in the downstream regions; t his can be explained via Rossby wave propagation As a result of the anomalous Arctic warming-induced atmospheric teleconnection, low-level anticyclone and upper-level cyclone anomalies, which provide favourable conditions for severe cold weather, are developed over North America.

I think we already know that you consider yourself to be more qualified to analyze all the data (that you don't have access to) than any world renowned geophysicist - so why ask Bilby if he is one?

 

[angelo]

Did I say he was?
Here are some world renowned geophysicists (as renowned as geophysicists get), saying what Bilby said:

Why Global Warming Can Mean Harsher Winter Weather

Read it and weep.

In the upper level, a distinctive anticyclone located over Alaska shows an equivalent barotropic structure (Fig. 1b). In addition, cyclonic and anticyclonic anomalies are located in the downstream regions; t his can be explained via Rossby wave propagation As a result of the anomalous Arctic warming-induced atmospheric teleconnection, low-level anticyclone and upper-level cyclone anomalies, which provide favourable conditions for severe cold weather, are developed over North America.

I think we already know that you consider yourself to be more qualified to analyze all the data (that you don't have access to) than any world renowned geophysicist - so why ask Bilby if he is one?

I'll let these REAL scientists respond in my place. [I've posted this before in an earlier post.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...th_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

 

[angelo]

Besides, I'm still waiting for an example of GB/CC prediction of doom made in the last few decades that has come to pass! You are aware of the saying about " false prophets" right!

 

[AirPoh]

Did I say he was?
Here are some world renowned geophysicists (as renowned as geophysicists get), saying what Bilby said:

Why Global Warming Can Mean Harsher Winter Weather

Read it and weep.

In the upper level, a distinctive anticyclone located over Alaska shows an equivalent barotropic structure (Fig. 1b). In addition, cyclonic and anticyclonic anomalies are located in the downstream regions; t his can be explained via Rossby wave propagation As a result of the anomalous Arctic warming-induced atmospheric teleconnection, low-level anticyclone and upper-level cyclone anomalies, which provide favourable conditions for severe cold weather, are developed over North America.

I think we already know that you consider yourself to be more qualified to analyze all the data (that you don't have access to) than any world renowned geophysicist - so why ask Bilby if he is one?

I'll let these REAL scientists respond in my place. [I've posted this before in an earlier post.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...th_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

The Grateful Dead Wiki page is bigger then that. This is not the kind of discussion that making jokes earns points.

- - - Updated - - -

Besides, I'm still waiting for an example of GB/CC prediction of doom made in the last few decades that has come to pass! You are aware of the saying about " false prophets" right!

I provided one, you seem to have ignored it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'll let these REAL scientists respond in my place. [I've posted this before in an earlier post.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...th_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

Note that the only people on your list with relevant credentials are retired.

- - - Updated - - -

Besides, I'm still waiting for an example of GB/CC prediction of doom made in the last few decades that has come to pass! You are aware of the saying about " false prophets" right!

And I'm still waiting for you to address the current greenhouse effect on the Earth.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

CO2 as fertilizer?

At least for trees, busted:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/co2-trees-1.5000709

 

[Elixir]

Did I say he was?
Here are some world renowned geophysicists (as renowned as geophysicists get), saying what Bilby said:

Why Global Warming Can Mean Harsher Winter Weather

Read it and weep.

In the upper level, a distinctive anticyclone located over Alaska shows an equivalent barotropic structure (Fig. 1b). In addition, cyclonic and anticyclonic anomalies are located in the downstream regions; t his can be explained via Rossby wave propagation As a result of the anomalous Arctic warming-induced atmospheric teleconnection, low-level anticyclone and upper-level cyclone anomalies, which provide favourable conditions for severe cold weather, are developed over North America.

I think we already know that you consider yourself to be more qualified to analyze all the data (that you don't have access to) than any world renowned geophysicist - so why ask Bilby if he is one?

I'll let these REAL scientists respond in my place. [I've posted this before in an earlier post.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...th_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

BWAHAHAHA! Of the hundreds of thousands of qualified scientists, the ones who "disagree" (i.e. are on the take or senescent, mostly) fit on that tiny list. Thanks for the laugh, and for reminding me of Project Steve, because that is of the same ilk.

 

[angelo]

I'll let these REAL scientists respond in my place. [I've posted this before in an earlier post.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...th_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

Note that the only people on your list with relevant credentials are retired.

- - - Updated - - -

Besides, I'm still waiting for an example of GB/CC prediction of doom made in the last few decades that has come to pass! You are aware of the saying about " false prophets" right!

And I'm still waiting for you to address the current greenhouse effect on the Earth.

The more important question should be: what's to be done with the main greenhouse cause? Water vapour!

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...s-co2-isnt-the-most-important-greenhouse-gas/

 

[angelo]

I suppose once the activists and bogus " climate scientists" have won their battle and increased power costs by hundreds of a percentage points with utilising un-economic alternatives such as very heavily subsided solar and wind, the next culprit to be tackled will be water vapour?

 

[Elixir]

I suppose once the activists and bogus " climate scientists" have won their battle ...

What criteria do you use to separate "bogus" scientists from real ones, angelo?
If you go by peer-reviewed publications and citations, the bogus ones are your fossil fuel shills who try to sow doubt about well established facts of climate change.

 

[repoman]

Angelo, do you think that because we as a society have ACTUALLY been burned with bullshit sociological "peer reviewed" (SCIENCE) that this hornswoggling translates into the very hard science of how methane and carbon dioxide trap heat and how a reduced arctic albedo is a dangerous trip line as just one example?

Because ideologues that never had good data lie does not invalidate solid data elsewhere.

You can both agree that Peter Boghossian and team exposed leftist soft science bullshit and that AGW is too hard a science to bullshit. A lot of people do.



Was Arrhenius in 1896 a lefty nutcase when he modeled how Carbon Dioxide levels affected climate?



Here is the source paper, skim it as it is very interesting

http://www.rsc.org/images/Arrhenius1896_tcm18-173546.pdf

-------------------------------------------------------

A final analogy example that is worth giving is that I saw Richard Dawkins give is him saying that fossils are not really needed to show the path of evolution. It is all in the genetics of existing species.

Even without relying on the great majority of data, AGW is still easy to demonstrate.

 

[untermensche]

The genetics of existing species only shows the winners.

The fossil record can show us some of the losers.

The huge dinosaurs.

We would not know about them looking only at present day genes.

 

[repoman]

The genetics of existing species only shows the winners.

The fossil record can show us some of the losers.

The huge dinosaurs.

We would not know about them looking only at present day genes.

Yes, but even if all fossil records were dismissed in an argument for evolution, current genetics of extant species is sufficient to prove it.

Interestingly, the radioactive atoms in DNA make all ancient DNA worthless even if it was kept in perfect storage.

 

[TSwizzle]

AGW is a religion. Based on wonky models, hypocrite Al Gore's demagoguery and Mann's hockey schtick. A faith based construct with zero evidence. Why do the nutters promulgate the idea that the earth's climate should be static ? The earth has always warmed and cooled. Bonkers to think otherwise.

 

[AirPoh]

AGW is a religion. Based on wonky models, hypocrite Al Gore's demagoguery and Mann's hockey schtick. A faith based construct with zero evidence. Why do the nutters promulgate the idea that the earth's climate should be static ? The earth has always warmed and cooled. Bonkers to think otherwise.

Name one nutter who does that.

 

[TSwizzle]

AGW is a religion. Based on wonky models, hypocrite Al Gore's demagoguery and Mann's hockey schtick. A faith based construct with zero evidence. Why do the nutters promulgate the idea that the earth's climate should be static ? The earth has always warmed and cooled. Bonkers to think otherwise.

Name one nutter who does that.

All of them at The Guardian.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Note that the only people on your list with relevant credentials are retired.

- - - Updated - - -



And I'm still waiting for you to address the current greenhouse effect on the Earth.

The more important question should be: what's to be done with the main greenhouse cause? Water vapour!

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...s-co2-isnt-the-most-important-greenhouse-gas/

You do not appear to understand your sources.

Yes, H2O is a substantial greenhouse gas but it's irrelevant in the big picture because the amount is determined by the temperature--it acts as an amplifier to any changes that happen, it doesn't cause them.

By blaming H2O you're blaming the amplifier for putting out ugly music.

 

[bilby]

AGW is a religion. Based on wonky models, hypocrite Al Gore's demagoguery and Mann's hockey schtick. A faith based construct with zero evidence. Why do the nutters promulgate the idea that the earth's climate should be static ? The earth has always warmed and cooled. Bonkers to think otherwise.

Temperature has always changed.

What matters is the RATE of change.

Current warming is unprecedented in more than 20,000 years.

https://www.xkcd.com/1732/