No one paper can do that. The science is tens (hundreds?) of thousands of papers confirming the mechanisms and refuting alternative hypotheses. Someone says, "it's volcanoes causing it", but you can't find a single paper that PROVES volcanoes are the primary driver of this episode of warming, either.
2016 - Record Cold
- Thread starter gwb-trading
- Start date
that is complete nosense ricter. you just pulled that out of your ass.
no one paper can do it, although they tried their asses off with the modeling, which failed on real time data in part because the data shows change in co2 trails change in ocean temps.
1. There is no peer reviewed science showing man made co2 causes warming.
2. There are hundreds of papers showing the temps are related to the sun and the tides.
Your team even admitted their models needed to incorporate the sun and the tide and volcanoes into their models.
3. CO2 lags change in ocean temps.
4. No one is arguing volcanoes are the exclusive driver of warming. If anything eruptions above ground seem to drive periods of cooling.
5. Under ocean volcanoes and vents maybe a big driver or ocean warming... which in turn drives temperture which leads cos.
no one paper can do it, although they tried their asses off with the modeling, which failed on real time data in part because the data shows change in co2 trails change in ocean temps.
1. There is no peer reviewed science showing man made co2 causes warming.
2. There are hundreds of papers showing the temps are related to the sun and the tides.
Your team even admitted their models needed to incorporate the sun and the tide and volcanoes into their models.
3. CO2 lags change in ocean temps.
4. No one is arguing volcanoes are the exclusive driver of warming. If anything eruptions above ground seem to drive periods of cooling.
5. Under ocean volcanoes and vents maybe a big driver or ocean warming... which in turn drives temperture which leads cos.
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2014/mar/26/would-climate-change-consensus-look/
I got to hand it to the oilgas industry though, they've succeeded in making people like yourself doubt the facts and that's all what's needed. That was their plan all along, to claim "there is no conclusive evidence".
1. I am an environmentalist who devoted time and money to clean ocean and bay causes. I believe that we have seen the big players in the oil and gas industry have switched over to your side... because as cronies and they realize agw legislation can cement in their businesses and prevent of competition.
I am just as skeptical of the oil and gas industry as you are.
do the research yourself before you accuse me of being unduly influenced.
if you really try to engage on a academic or truthful level you will find there is no peer reviewed science showing man made co2 causes warming. Check Powells database...
There are no peer reviewed articles stating man made co2 causes warming other than old ones relying on failed models.
2. Powell was obviously faking... because here are 1300 hundred peer reviewed articles skeptical of man made co2 causing warming.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
Click on the link you will see this intro and then the link to some interesting papers
"A tour de force list of scientific papers..."
- Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Environmental Scientist
"Wow, the list is pretty impressive ...It's Oreskes done right."
- Luboš Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physicist
"I really appreciate your important effort in compiling the list."
- Willie Soon, Ph.D. Astrophysicist and Geoscientist
"An excellent place to start to take stock of the scientific diversity of positions on AGW."
- Emil A.Røyrvik, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist
"...it's a very useful resource. Thanks to the pop tech team."
- Joanne Nova, Author of The Skeptics Handbook
"I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech's list..."
- John Cook, Cartoonist at Skeptical Science
I am just as skeptical of the oil and gas industry as you are.
do the research yourself before you accuse me of being unduly influenced.
if you really try to engage on a academic or truthful level you will find there is no peer reviewed science showing man made co2 causes warming. Check Powells database...
There are no peer reviewed articles stating man made co2 causes warming other than old ones relying on failed models.
2. Powell was obviously faking... because here are 1300 hundred peer reviewed articles skeptical of man made co2 causing warming.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
Click on the link you will see this intro and then the link to some interesting papers
"A tour de force list of scientific papers..."
- Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Environmental Scientist
"Wow, the list is pretty impressive ...It's Oreskes done right."
- Luboš Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physicist
"I really appreciate your important effort in compiling the list."
- Willie Soon, Ph.D. Astrophysicist and Geoscientist
"An excellent place to start to take stock of the scientific diversity of positions on AGW."
- Emil A.Røyrvik, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist
"...it's a very useful resource. Thanks to the pop tech team."
- Joanne Nova, Author of The Skeptics Handbook
"I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech's list..."
- John Cook, Cartoonist at Skeptical Science
Ah, yes, failed models because you said so, gotcha.
Oil industry has never been on "our side". They've tried every possible method to haze, discredit, manipulate, lie about the subject. I don't care about sides, there's nothing in it for me personally except clean air. My agenda would be to see gasoline engines disappear completely, I don't see why anyone reasonably would be against that - unless you get paid by the oil industry.
Focus on small points instead of the larger issue? You have not even tried to produce any peer reviewed papers showing man made co2 cause warming. you have all of powells database to find some.
The papers I have found about the models claiming co2 causes warming were more than a decade old. Those models have all completely failed on real time data. Models are not even science anyway. They are models.
A few of the recent models are hanging out very close to the point of failure.. but those models are no longer claiming to find that man made co2 causes warming. These more recent models if you read the IPCC literature are presenting scenarios. Because the the models basic functions assume co2 causes warming.
2. Here the IPPC Climate expert admits the models are failing...
http://www.spiegel.de/international...lems-with-climate-change-models-a-906721.html
Climate experts have long predicted that temperatures would rise in parallel with greenhouse gas emissions. But, for 15 years, they haven't. In a SPIEGEL interview, meteorologist Hans von Storch discusses how this "puzzle" might force scientists to alter what could be "fundamentally wrong" models.
The papers I have found about the models claiming co2 causes warming were more than a decade old. Those models have all completely failed on real time data. Models are not even science anyway. They are models.
A few of the recent models are hanging out very close to the point of failure.. but those models are no longer claiming to find that man made co2 causes warming. These more recent models if you read the IPCC literature are presenting scenarios. Because the the models basic functions assume co2 causes warming.
2. Here the IPPC Climate expert admits the models are failing...
http://www.spiegel.de/international...lems-with-climate-change-models-a-906721.html
Climate experts have long predicted that temperatures would rise in parallel with greenhouse gas emissions. But, for 15 years, they haven't. In a SPIEGEL interview, meteorologist Hans von Storch discusses how this "puzzle" might force scientists to alter what could be "fundamentally wrong" models.
Considering that links to hundreds of peer reviewed scientific articles questioning AGW have been posted in this forum over the past couple of years -- your assertion is very much in doubt. Coupled with there is no where near 11,000 peer reviewed studies supporting AGW published. Most articles - as per feedback from their authors - take no position on global warming. Yet this did not stop the clown Cook (who is funded by Al Gore) from making this assertion and publishing yet another pie chart.
Last edited:
Don't be to hard on him. A lot of people don't understand how climate change works.