The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

Send some of those cash helicopters to Sri Lanka!

 

You do realise that there is weather and climate outside America?

 

Of course not. I just explained how obvious it is that his opinion is political and centered around a purely American POW. He responds with a map of US measurement stations he thinks are registering bad data as if there is no one outside the US measuring the temperature.
You can't make this stuff up.

 

That's the effect of the American Bubble for you where nothing outside really exists.

 

Did you know approximately 60% of the global land measurement stations are in the US? Did you know that land/ocean measurements only cover approximately 25% of the globe? Probably not.

 

And....?

 

Since you have shown on numerous occasions that you cannot be trusted could you please source these claims?

 

Thanks for showing how little you know about this and why you continue to buy the media alarmism. I do find that most of the 'believers' are on the left because for them, it is political instead of about science.

Now, can you tell us why the longest actual temperature record, the CET, has shown slight warming for over 400 years long before this current and short AGW alarmist religion started?

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly, you don't need to think, just believe.

 

You mean just like you do?

 

So in other words, you don't have to think or actually delve into the science, you just repeat what you hear from alarmists.

 

Nice rant. Where are the sources I asked for? Why am I not surprised you didn't provide the only thing I asked for and instead continued with your lame posts as usual?

 

No old chap. Unlike you I do read ALL the available information and form an opinion based on that; I don't cherry-pick whatever happens to support my agenda. After all that would be dishonest.

 

So far no one can answer any of these simple questions so I will try another.

What fuels and drives an El Nino?

 

How about this one, what important and very influential factor in the misnamed greenhouse effect is not modeled very well and the reason has to do with the Navier–Stokes equation?

- - - Updated - - -

Then you should easily answer some of the questions I have posed.

 

I don't have the time right now, so I'll leave you to do the explaining. Is that ok?

https://universe-review.ca/R13-10-NSeqs.htm

 

Please provide the sources for this claim

I am not interested in all your rehearsed buzz words and sentences. You were asked a simple question so answer it.
People should be banned for posting false claims or refusing to provide sources for their claims. 42.462 posts eh? What a joke.

 

In other words, you don't know.

- - - Updated - - -

In other words, you too have no clue about what you push. I do find this to be common among those that only listen to the media and alarmists.

 

Sorry, Hoosier. You've said it's nothing much but a cartoon site; I've said it's a great intro to climate change backed up with hundreds (probably thousands) of some high level stuff. Time to find out who'd been telling truth, wouldn't you say?

 

[h=1]NASA Exposed In ‘Massive’ New Climate Data Fraud[/h]The data has been carefully [FONT=Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]analyzed by a respected data computation expert Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert and is being made publicly available for independent verification.[/FONT]Professor Ewert’s findings seem to show NASA has intentionally and systematically rigged the official government record of global temperatures to show recent global warming where none would exist without the upwards ‘revisions.’
The astonishing results are now available online to the public. P Gosselin of notrickzone.com reports: http://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/

How can you take anyone serious that trusts the government?

 

This is hilarious. You posted a claim and I asked you to provide a source. A couple of posts later where I have written nothing besides asking you to source the claim and you go off on rants about me having no clue and that I listen to media and alarmists?

Where is the source for your claim? Come on now little guy. 42.466 posts later you must know how to source your claims?

So... For the third time.
Give your sources for this claim

 

The failed cartoonist site (un)SkepticalScience is also full of misdirection. It is an alarmist blog.

 

I've already built my own house. What's your problem?
AGW is a made up political strawman.
Climate change is natural and AlGore's clock already ran out. The oceans haven't risen at his alarmist rate and they haven't even got close to the rate of warming predicted in EVERY DAMN MODEL they put out.
New York City was just a tiny colony 350 years ago.
If you think 350 years of 1/4 inch a year rise in the oceans is a huge problem, you need to get a motorized scooter to move you away.
They call them a Hoverround.

 

Dude, don't get all in a hussy. I made a mistake in quoting your response to My Best Friend claims. I am sort of on your side. As I posted before climate change is already here. We are all but beyond the tipping point and still the luddites and ideologues don't want to accept it. I say fine. It is time to pop a beer and watch the show. I am done trying to convince the ignorant.

 

Do and believe what you want. Don't care anymore. It is just time to sit back and enjoy the roller coaster ride. Again I am done trying to convince the ignorant. If you do not want to believe what has become obvious then fine. Burry your head into your own little life and have fun. Say whatever you want to and look as ignorant as you want to. Climate change is real. It is happening now. The results are in and we done effed up. You want to believe we can pump anything we want into the environment and not change anything fine. It is the height of ignorance and hubris. It defies the basic laws of science which we know to be true. Again believe don't believe, don't care anymore. If you cannot see what is front of your face it is not worth telling you about it.

 

You mean after the survey that showed 97% of scientists believe in the church of climate change has been proven falsified they decided to make a new one? Ok, good decision.

Climate change or global warming? First alarmists were saying global warming but now this is climate change. Why because nobody is scared of warm weather anymore? Actually they enjoy it. They enjoy it so much that they pay money to go South on vacation.

Global Warming is indeed happening but it is happening very slow and with pauses that alarmists can not neither predict nor explain. They can't predict nothing at all. All their predictions are always wrong. And it is no wonder! It takes a supercomputer to make a wheather forecast for a couple of weeks (which are often wrong anyway) but they claim they know what will happen to the Global Climate in decades!

And their arguments are trully wonderfull! There are 97% scientists who think this way so the debate is over. If you think the debate is not over then you are antiscientific. What a nonsense! In science consensus means nothing. Facts means everything. An if some scientific theory is always making wrong predictions then something is trully wrong with it!