Global Warming

[IQS.RLOW]

One of my missions is to win this debate and the fact that you are losing and it annoys you is just a side benefit.

You claim it is debunked when those that have the science and knowledge say the opposite. Climate change/warming is real.
The laws of physics are non-negotiable. Don't you believe in the laws of physics? is your head so clouded by your dogma that you can not understand the physical world and the laws that govern it?

One of the reasons why you have lost the argument is that you still insist on framing it around nothing that I have said. My argument has always and ever been about CAGW that you just love and has been proven to be bullshit. This is why you won't win any debate, because you don't debate what is being argued. The core tenant of the argument is your chicken little panic merchant garbage. There is no catastrophe and there will be no catastrophe despite your best scare mongering, because
1. Climate sensitivity is not at the level your chicken shit-yourself little scary stories portray.
2. Slight Warming is beneficial for the earth and all indicators point to a much milder situation than your chicken shit-yourself little would like to believe.


Perhaps now every time you think about posting a long winded boring piece of shit opinion piece you can refer back to this post and reframe it in the correct context? You know, none of this "don't you believe in physics" garbage you insist on pulling out when you find yourself unable to explain the lack of warming and why your theory isn't performing as you hoped.

[DaS Energy]

A man once saw an elephant, then spent the rest of his life denying any such animal!

[IQS.RLOW]

Shut the fuck up.

[DaS Energy]

Shut the fuck up.

Greg Hunt Speech!

Let me set out the points of bipartisan agreement in this area:
##We agree on the science
##We agree on the targets
##We agree on market mechanisms

If ever there was a problem requiring new solutions to be unearthed, it is climate change.

[Super Nova]

One of the reasons why you have lost the argument is that you still insist on framing it around nothing that I have said Alright. Let me again respond to your posts.

Maybe true of late however I have addressed your statement in detail previously. During the banter you request evidence or proof or say there is none.

Let's see how we go. I will not respond with evidence of renown scientific experts.... just my opinion... for a while.

My argument has always and ever been about CAGW that you just love and has been proven to be bullshit.

Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (climate change) is not bullshit it just has been shown that the forecasts from 10 years or more ago were not accurate with regards to the rate of surface temperature increase. Warming has not stopped it just did not manifest itself in the short term with surface temperatures rising at the rate predicted.

CAGW is not bullshit. Your scientific method is... you failed to predict it 100% correct therefore the whole theory must be wrong. Let discuard it and stick our head in the sand.

The reality is, this area of scientific endeavour probably has the most scrutiny of any due to this failure to predict accurately. So their reports and projections will be better reviewed and challenged. The effect will be better predictions and these will effect world policies. Get ready... a policy decision is coming and will effect you soon.

This is why you won't win any debate, because you don't debate what is being argued. The core tenant of the argument is your chicken little panic merchant garbage.

I am not panicking. The core tenant of my argument is that we need to challenge the science that lead to invalid modelling, improve our understanding and forecast with greater accuracy. This has been done and it forecasts that if we do square root of fuck all to reduce our GHGs we will in the longer term greater as real disaster. The timeline for that disaster is unclear but it is clear it will happen.

I have argued this is not an acceptable risk. In fact it has moved from a risk to an issue. We need to do something to mitigate this risk. You argue doing nothing is fine because if it happens the world will just have to adapt. very narrow and short sighted of you.

When I start to point you down you cycle around again going over old stuff that has been dealt with.

Do you accept there is global warming?

There is no catastrophe and there will be no catastrophe despite your best scare mongering, because
1. Climate sensitivity is not at the level your chicken shit-yourself little scary stories portray.
2. Slight Warming is beneficial for the earth and all indicators point to a much milder situation than your chicken shit-yourself little would like to believe.

I am not say there IS a catastrophe. I am saying if do nothing... there will be.
A 1 degree increase globally is a "Slight Warming". 5 to 8 degrees is not.

Perhaps now every time you think about posting a long winded boring piece of shit opinion piece you can refer back to this post and reframe it in the correct context?

If you stay the cause of this argument posted here... happy to.

You know, none of this "don't you believe in physics" garbage you insist on pulling out when you find yourself unable to explain the lack of warming and why your theory isn't performing as you hoped.

You keep referring to old models that clearly are not accurate and science has acknowledged that and is presenting new forecasts based on improved data, improved models, improved reviews.

Let use the next IPPPC output as the new baseline for you to argue from shall we. You keep referring to models I have accepted has being incorrect in the short term forecasting.

[Super Nova]

IQ

Check this out. When I read this I had to go WTF.

This sort of stuff adds fuel to your fire. Enjoy.

Turner helps global warming study

Scientists are studying Turner's paintings of vivd sunsets to help them understand how pollutions levels in the Earth's atmosphere change over the centuries


The vivid sunsets painted by J.M.W. Turner are famous for their use of colour and light and their influence on the Impressionists. But now they are also helping global-warming experts track climate change.

more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/enviro ... study.html

[IQS.RLOW]

As I have said before, its not science. It's a religion, and its on par with Islam as a socio-religious-form of govt and beauracracy and just as or even more dangerous due to the high number of extremists that it seems to attract.

A couple of bits of food for thought...
Why are all models weighted towards the plus side of CAGW?
Why have the scientists tried to "hide the decline"?
Why the push for "action now"?
Why "the science is settled"?
Why invent catastrophic scenarios?
Why have the left latched onto this proposition?
Why offer a bogus consensus?
Why try to scare?
Why force emissions trading?

Why, when you take all the above into account and happening concurrently, why aren't you suspicious of the 'end game'?

[IQS.RLOW]

Quick, we must get the governments to agree or we will all be rooooned. All of our investments will be up the creek when the temperature starts to fall in line with every other cycle. We have only one chance at this until the next cycle which will be 1000s of years away. Get the message out that we must act now. Scare them if you have too.

[IQS.RLOW]

[DaS Energy]

Well researched natural healthy to fever temperature change!
No changes in behaviour can be expected?