Scientists Get Buried In Snow At Davos While Lecturing On Global Warming

How was it manipulated and what makes you think it can't be trusted?

 

What's wrong with that?

 

That seems to be your default go-to line. Political affiliation has nothing to do with this. The only ones I ever see bringing that up are lefties. That tells me that you think science is right because of YOUR left wing political affiliation. Everyone else is smart enough to see that even if the globe is warming up, it won't have an effect on us at its going rate, and even if we spent trillions of dollars, we'll never reverse the natural change of the climate.

 

Sure. That's why it's a good thing the science does the opposite.

And the science does that. We've assessed what the sum total of the natural factors are doing. The natural factors are pushing the climate towards slow cooling.y cool. Since the climate is quickly warming, that means the warming is not natural.

 

I have to admit. That is pretty ironic.

 

Build a time machine, grab the tools you'll need, and go find out. If you can't do that then you'll never accurately know what it was.

 

He lied to you and you fell for it hook, line, and sinker then. His claim was not based on science at all. He literally made that 2013 prediction up.

 

Ideologues can cherry-pick those factoids that climatologists provide them to deny the conclusions reached through a comprehensive analysis by those same scientists, but the significant distinction of anthropogenic change is its rapidity. Aside from cataclysmic shifts - asteroidal, volcanic - the record shows slow and gradual change vs the current precipitous rise.

Pretending that millions of tonnes of industrial greenhouse gases can be spewed into the atmosphere and have no impact on the atmosphere is a silly, ideologically-dogmatic conceit that defies the global consensus.

 

At least you can see the humor.

 

Well, Hawking said that if time travel is possible, where are the tourists from the future?

We'll just have to wait until all cars are electric and combustion is outlawed even in homeless camps, and the cities are rebuilt not to accumulate solar heat.

Then in a few hundred years there will be an answer, let it be.

 

Ya know...if people actually got to know me I genuinely think they'd find me affable even if we disagreed. But yeah, I also still get a chuckle when people say "I got 6 inches of global warming". I mean, come on, that's funny. If you can't laugh at yourself then you're going to have a miserable life.

 

It's a revelation. Do tell. Where has science documented and published those mathematical processes? Ill wait. The world waits. If you believe that natural forces, whoever or whatever they are since you haven't identified them, are pushing the climate towards cooling, do tell. Show us this revelatory consensus position of which you now assert. Again, I'll wait.

Similarly, you profess the concept of "quickly warming" as a descriptive functional explanation that anyone should agree to that "demonstrates" the "unnaturalness" of the "warming" that you assert is "quickly happening. Ok, again, I'll wait. Show your work.

To put a super fine point on it. Science, to date, cannot, and has not produced a repeatable experiment that demonstrates the current dynamic atmospheric conditions. Not even at the local level. Science, to date, still has not produced the scientific formula that demonstrates previous dynamic climate shifts. Science, to date has not, nor do they assert that, they have a functional knowledge of or demonstrable method to assert non natural influences in our dynamic atmosphere, nor do they have any factual basis for demonstrating that any of the conclusions published can be replicated.

We also know that depending on which operating system, which data service, and which language a model was created on when moved no longer produces the same results. That's like saying, if you did the math, 1 + 1 on paper equals 2. But on their model, it might not, using different paper. In this case, that variance has real statistical significance, and deeply effects the usefulness and credibility of those models.

 

No, you probably never knew. Global warming is the name that was given to the changes in weather that have been attributed to man made pollution. It does not mean that the temperature on the planet earth are just simply going to gradually go up. We're seeing changes in the weather that have never been recorded before. Many people smarter than any of us here blame pollution for causing the changes. What we have been experiencing on our east cost for this past month or so is considered a result of global warming.

 

And Gore would tell you that his buddy Michael Mann was his source. And yet, you assert now that he lied? Will wonders ever cease?

 

If most of your cult here didn't constantly rave that global warming is a socialist conspiracy, that wouldn't be such a funny statement.

Unlike the rational side, your side makes this entirely political. The global warming denial movement wouldn't exist if the right-wing-extremist political cult wasn't pushing it as cult dogma. Global warming denial isn't the actual cult. Right wing extremism is the cult, and global warming denial is just one of many bizarre beliefs that the cult commands its acolytes to believe. Examples of other bizarre reality-defying conspiratorial beliefs of that cult are that DDT is harmless, that the media is liberal, that ozone depletion was a hoax, that the FBI is conspiring against Trump, and that supply side economics works.

In contrast, the good science crosses all political boundaries all over the world, because it's science, not politics.

Everyone else sees you provided no support for that claim, just as you never provide any support for your claims. We also know that the actual data contradicts that claim, being the hard data says the warming is not natural.

 

Hmm... Slow, and measured? Perhaps you'll explain the rapid onset of the last mini ice age? Seems that within less than 3 decades thing radically changed, did they not? So, rapidity seems to not be as determinative as you assert. Perhaps you'd like to restate it?

 

Really? Can you back up that claim? Or are you just trying to slur Mann's science by faking a story about Gore?

https://www.snopes.com/ice-caps-melt-gore-2014/

Somebody's lying here, we can all agree on that.

In any case, Gore Rule invoked, Whoever starts yammering about Gore forfeits the thread for their side. Those who can talk about science, do. Those who can't, they deflect by talking about Gore.

 

Wrong, they blame C02 which is not pollution.

 

It's easy to explain. You're repeating some kind of cult urban legend.

No. Who told you such a thing?

 

What about the really stupid people who make really ignorant conclusions about a hot day?

I'm supposed to be melting down here but my faucets are dripping every night and my heater is working overtime because we've never seen this many consecutive days below freezing. This whole global warming thing was a hoax started by Al Gore to attract the pests to the bug light, he's the one that said the ice caps will be melted in 13 years ago. He should have never tried to make this an issue in his 2000 run for president. It was as pointless then as it is now. We might as well spend billions/trillions paying scientists to come up with a theory explaining why the sun rises in the East like it has done for the last 4 billion years. That concept is about as hard to grasp as the Earth's climate changing.

Maybe someday someone will come along and tell us the sun is rising faster and causing the days to end faster which is causing humans to age quicker and in 15 years we'll all die of old age.

 

Hmm.... So this quote from twitter...

Former Vice President Al Gore has weighed in on the record cold and snow in the U.S. “It’s bitter cold in parts of the US, but climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann explains that’s exactly what we should expect from the climate crisis,” Gore wrote on January 4 on Twitter.

So, seems to me that you have some half stepping to do....

 

I have found you to be a reasonable debate opponent who sticks to the subject and doesn't end in a rage and spewing insults after I prove you wrong. (Just threw those last few words in because everything seems funny to me today. Well that and because you can take some good natured razzing).

 

Stephen Hawking's said global warming is going to turn Earth into Venus. I wonder how much ice there is on Venus? There must be a lot due to the gore effect.

Whenever I want to cool down my house I close all the windows and turn the heater on.

 

Try opening the refrigerator. That's why a lefty would do.

 

But I have to keep all the heat so I can make the cold?