Search results

But, if he keeps it up, he will be eventually.:D

I'm not going to comment on the Yahoo version, but if you'll give me the citation to the paper it is based on, I'll be happy to take a look at it. Nevermind. I've found it.

NASA and NOAA are government agencies, and they publish many reports that are not subjected to outside peer review. They also publish the opinions of their scientists in simplified form that is not subjected to critical technical review, but rather is intended to inform the public or the media...

Exactly! The people who support these laws don't anticipate that they would apply to religions other than their own.

That's true in my opinion, and he keeps repeating the same unproved arguments, that are inconsistent with observation, over and over.

Nitro, for me the most serious contradiction present in the arguments of those still holding to the Hansen AGW hypothesis is their assumption of positive feedback. I am a Ph.D. Scientist with many years of experience both carrying out and directing research, and have published many papers in the...

This illustrates how potentially dangerous religion is still today. Here is another example of dangers posed by religious zealots. http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2014/html/SB/2600-2699/SB2681PS.htm

Those Lacis research briefs in no way qualify as peer reviewed primary literature. See the peer reviewed, primary research literature that the excerpts I posted link to. You are getting ideas from the common media. If you want to have a much better understanding you'll have to read the primary...

Here is more good reading for you: http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2012/02/08/a-significant-measure-of-negative-feedback-to-global-warming/

Your ideas are a reflection of a very incorrect model for global warming. The model used by Lacis, et al., one of Hansen's boys. If you do a search on google for "Which is the more important Greenhouse gas, CO2 or Water Vapor?" You will turn up page after page of articles, I suppose...

:confused:

The polls were wrong, but I was right. I knew Trump was finished well before the Wisconsin primary. He is irrelevant now..

Water vapor is by far the Earth's most important greenhouse gas. Forty percent of virtually nothing is still nothing.

First you have to validate a model, before it can be invalidated. All models start out invalid and must be validated. The current models have yet to be validated. They are in excellent agreement with the past 100 years however!, because they are all fit to past data.

You're a bit late to have recognized that Trump is irrelevant. It became obvious well before the Wisconsin Primary. See, for example: post#4266091

That's correct. TARP does not account for the entire amount of balance sheet expansion, but it is part of it. That is a point I have tried to make here many, many times, and thankfully it seems to be sinking in with those who foolishly maintain that QE accomplished nothing. Nothing could, in...

You know what? I'd take tremendous pleasure from mixing together wealth redistribution and Portland Cement and shoving it up your ass. (It is marvelous what insults you can get away with once some imbecile has put you on ignore. I love it!!!)

Legal low income labor is immobile. I did not say that, but I implied it because it is true. Don't you think the 0.03% illegals problem has been a bit exaggerated? It is a concern of course, and we must have control over immigration. You'll find 100% agreement on that. But lets focus our...

You're not alone, though I don't share that view..

We need a Federal minimum hike to 15 in stages and then a continuous hike to keep up with inflation, i.e., ~2%/yr forever. But it is not a good idea to have piecemeal hikes . States that have hiked will experience an economic boom, but those ridiculous Republican Governor states that are...