Global warming?

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by tw

But numbers say global temperatures even in the past decade have increased significantly.

Climate scientists disagree with you.

Here is the PDF of the paper from the researchers at the National Academy of Sciences:

http://cellar.org/2011/pnas-201102467.pdf

Here is the chart they created to indicate what various models suggested 1998-2008, and the actual temperature records are in black:



It's all peer-reviewed.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Climate scientists disagree with you.

Peer reviewed like so many other papers peer reviewed by White House lawyers?

The Economist charts numbers are from the six major climate research organizations. All disagree ... so little as to confirm each other. Only wacko extremist political organizations disagree.

Each source is cited by The Economist. Your chart was previously found to be suspect. Your chart does not even cite its one source. So a discredited chart is reposted?

Global warming is challenged when, for example, a TV weatherman's political agenda promotes myths. Virtually no science disputes it. 117 peer reviewed papers from a poster who did not even read and could not understand any. That is proof that global warming does not exist? Yes, a political agenda can order the most naive to recite what they must believe. Hitler did the same with Jews. Also proven only because the most naive believed a political agenda.

Earth's climate is getting warmer at a dangerous rate. No responsible sources deny that - as The Economist so responsibly reports. A previous world record for climate change took 20,000 years. And took another 200,000 years to undo. Today mankind is accomplishing same in only hundreds of years. But White House lawyers and empty claims of 117 papers dispute reality. Therefore global warming must not exist.

Where is their science? Not found where a political agenda can even get many to believe lies such as Saddam's WMDs. Those too only existed for political reasons - reality be damned.

Wacko extremists touted denials by citing Dr Muller. They heard a conclusion - nothing more. Did not bother to learn details. Were shocked when Dr Muller said what he was always saying. Extremists only heard a bottom line. Only heard what their political agenda wanted them to hear - science and honesty be damned.

Why did they tout Dr Muller?

Expecting science to subvert climate change advocates, a Republican Congress sought immediate testimony from Dr Muller. Only to learn what their political agenda is again contradicted by science.

Where is responsible science that disputes Dr Muller? Never posted.

117 papers that somehow say global warming does not exist - and that poster did not even read one. Coign is a classic example of why so many are so easily brainwashed by a political agenda. He knew what the political agenda ordered him to believe - nothing more. That, BTW, meets the definition of brainwashing.

Charted are numbers from responsible science. All show temperature increases every decade as science also predicts. Only a political agenda disputes it. When Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck know science must be wrong. And when Coign could not even bother to read his 117 papers. Just more reasons to know global warming is created by mankind.

Why do facts and numbers from the Economist disagree with your previously discredited chart?

[Coign]

Originally Posted by tw

117 papers that somehow say global warming does not exist - and that poster did not even read one. Coign is a classic example of why so many are so easily brainwashed by a political agenda. He knew what the political agenda ordered him to believe - nothing more. That, BTW, meets the definition of brainwashing.

I came back to just see how this thread was going to find out you are STILL attacking me and lying about me.

That was NINE HUNDRED papers that said global warming is NOT caused by humans. And I READ 15 of them and had earlier posted examples from 4 of them. (They are very dry reading.)

But others on sites I trust have read them and posted over-reaching synopsis letting me know, they are proof if I would take the time to read more.

WHERE is your proof? I showed you proof and you dismiss it out of hand by saying it doesn't count because I did not read more than 15 of them. HOW MANY papers have you read and post them. I will post the paper that disproves it.

TW, you are a babbling loon that is guilty of exactly what you accuse me of.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Climate scientists disagree with you.

Here is the PDF of the paper from the researchers at the National Academy of Sciences:

http://cellar.org/2011/pnas-201102467.pdf

Here is the chart they created to indicate what various models suggested 1998-2008, and the actual temperature records are in black:



It's all peer-reviewed.

Wow! The few little steps we took saved our cynical asses. All hail Al Gore, Savior of the Temperate Zones and Slayer of Green House Gases.