My area is getting hit hard by global warming

Do you understand the difference between fraud and criticism? Fraud: Steyn wrote "Michael Mann was the man behind the fraudulent climate-change “hockey-stick” graph,".
Not fraud: Dr. Mann: "The overwhelming consensus among climate scientists is that human-caused climate change is happening. Yet a fringe minority of our populace clings to an irrational rejection of well-established science. This virulent strain of anti-science infects the halls of Congress, the pages of leading newspapers and what we see on TV, leading to the appearance of a debate where none should exist."

 

It has been proven to be fraudulent so what's your point?

 

The point is your repeated flouting of the rules of this forum

http://www.politicalforum.com/rules.php

 

>>>MOD EDIT: INSULT<<<<
It is simple really. To disprove the `Hockey Stick', it is sufficient to merely demonstrate conclusively the existence of the Medieval Warm Period and/or the Little Ice Age in proxy and/or historical evidence from around the world. According to the `falsifiability' principle of science, substantial physical evidence that contradicts a theory is sufficient to `falsify' that theory. To that end, `exhibits' of physical evidence are presented to prove that not only is the `Hockey Stick' false, but that the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age were not only very real - but also global in extent.

>>>MOD EDIT: INSULT<<<

 

Bull hockey. I do plenty of reading, but unlike you I don't read fiction when it comes to climate.
Another unsubstantiated claim.The opinions on CO2Now and wattsup are not considered "proof"
Again show me the proof that "Also it is disingenuous to tack on real data to a proxy data record when the only real comparison you can make is proxy to proxy data."

source

 

LOL, an opinion article written by a left wing hack is certainly science to you isn't it?

 

And tornadoes. You know because there was never any severe ones in the past only moving forward in time as long as you're a climate scientist!

- - - Updated - - -

You don't have summer? I thought we had climate change. hmm....

 

Ah but that one degree that beat that 100 year old record is proof of the global warming. And don't you forget it mister.

- - - Updated - - -

prove it!

 

Yawn..........

- - - Updated - - -

Yawn ...squared!!!!!

 

Well my friend when you start asking people to forfeit life styles, In my world, you have to prove it. And to date, there is no evidence that an increase in CO2 causes temperature change. None! There is evidence that warming temperatures cause more CO2 in the atmosphere. Go read about it. Then while your galavanting around the internet find one experiment that shows an increase in CO2 causes temperature change. The only one out there is Mythbusters and they almost got it right, but failed to continue the test. They also showed that without CO2 the air would be cooler so indeed CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Just more of it doesn't trigger changes in temperature. Again find one.

 

Yoo Bubba, there is no evidence that an increase in CO2 causes a change in temperature. Science hasn't proven that. So theory is just theory, there are ways to test that theory and so far, none have demonstrated that logical point. Did I studder?

 

when the ice melts on the poles, weather in outer area will be more extreme (IE out of the norm)

- - - Updated - - -

what causes a green house for plants to warm? trapped heat, why it's called the greenhouse effect...

.

 

Blah, blah,blah,blah.. come on man ain't you got anything better than this? Scienc is science so we all must believe it because a scientist said it? Really? How about one of these scientists merely prove it? Why can't they do that? Because it is complicated? Maybe?

- - - Updated - - -

Ah, but it is because he said so!!!!!

 

Do you believe Mythbusters?

 

Again, why would anyone take a bet with you. All you do is deny the lie. I did produce factual links that you poo, pooed, with no reasonable explanation other than saying the links weren't reliable to you! And the big part here is... "to you". LOL,

I challenge you to show one experiment that shows that an increase in CO2 actually causes a temperature rise. One! You've tried and I've been abe to rebute the test since they didn't increase the CO2 to show the test. Nope, an increase in CO2 that results in a rise on a thermometer. Mythbusters 2009 test was the closest one, but they didn't take the CO2 up. However, there youtube video showed that as they increased CO2 in the experiment the temperature stayed steadily one degree above the controlled air chamber. The temperature did not climb any higher than that through all of the incrementing of the CO2 up to 300PPM. I wanted them to take that up to 400PPM and they didn't.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you really that naive?

 

You do know that all of the scientists you all want to use here are not scientists right? There are people who use data collected by scientists or sites with records. You don't need to be a baseball player to know that three outs is the end of a half inning. cough, cough, cough. whew the odor is really get strong here.

- - - Updated - - -

There it is...see it's called cherry picking when evidence of something is shown to be incorrect. LOL... prove that CO2 causes a temperature rise.

 

oh, the old deflect excuse comes out! Wah hoooo

 

I ask but one fact, show that CO2 causes an increase in temperature. Can you find that proof?

- - - Updated - - -

No it means you can't

 

Based on what? What proof is there that emissions change climate?

 

Huh, that isn't what I asked for. See you ignore the question. I know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I asked you alarmists to show that an increase in CO2 causes an increase in temperature. Not that infrared lamps in a tent can cause warming. BTW, where does the CO2 come from in those tents, don't plants give off oxygen?

 

huh? where's that link?

 

any link I use is from a real scientist, has actual data which can be verified or will have a link to the research...I don't link to vacant talking heads...

but you need to have studied science past the 6th grade to have any clue what's being discussed...cough cough...

 

so embarrasing to be you...according to you co2 is a ghg and ghgs make our planet habitable but then according to brilliant logic comprehensible only to you, increasing those same ghgs that retain our heat can't increse temp! ...oh my we've hit rock bottom now, surely we've moved into the realm black magic where the laws of chemistry and physics no longer apply...

 

Ah, is all the data from that scientist or is it that scientist used data from other services to compile a graph? So the question is, is the data from the scientists always that scientists data?

 

Ah, I did...and it's still absurd and idiotic....and that you think it was a good idea tells what about you?