Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents

You have become a preacher of anti science. You abandon real science and real statistics and throw out specious arguments. Then when asked to focus on facts you clam up.

So step up... show us how you arrive at these confidence levels.
But, please take care to note that warming precedes CO2 levels in all our data.
I really hope you can grasp what that means and therefore how full of shit you sound when you make these specious posts.

you make up this shit about confidence levels as if science can create confidence levels about pure speculations.

There is no science stating man made co2 causing warming.
There is no science showing we are warming outside of natural variations.

Therefore your side has no confidence intervals about the hypothesis that man made co2 causes warming.



nitro said:
Notice how they hold the science arguments on one hand when debating you, but as the logic of their thinking becomes more untenable and begins to act as an enemy to their position, the reasons for denying become closer to explanations of things unseen. So they get to use science against scientists until the corner of doubt left is a sliver of hope - then they turn to "volcanoes under the arctic". It doesn't matter that your explanation is a 2 standard deviation of being true and theirs is 50 standard deviations of being true.

That is the true beauty of science - for some reason nature does not tolerate contradictions.

But, sound like anything else you hear from right wing people? Have you seen this anywhere else in human societies - explanations by unseen forces? :D
More...
 
Last edited:
nitro said:
If I had the time, I would do much much much more than that. I would

  1. Install a cassandra and spark cluster on Amazon Web Services
  2. I would download massive amounts of publicly available weather data into cassandra
  3. I would implement the current weather models into spark and allow people to run their own queries which would then be served onto a website
  4. Provide p-values for the results
The problem is, I don't even have time for my normal work as I already work 15 hour days. However, I follow Robbie Strickland from the weather channel

http://data-informed.com/weather-channel-manages-data-deluge-combination-platforms/

You might be able to ping him for it.
More...
So you just make shit up and believe it. Got it.
 
futurecurrents said:
Yeah, they did that troll. It's manmade global warming.
More...
All I am asking you to do is prove it. You are stating that it is a fact that AGW is causing melting. Prove it! Quantify how much is caused by AGW, geothermal activity and TSI.

At least quantify how much the geothermal activity has increased or decreased since 1880. Is geothermal activity responsible for 99.999999999999999999999% of any melting that you think is occurring or not?
 
I see you beat me to the post.
Last time he made up crap about confidence levels I called him out and at least he had the spine to look it up. He found out that his confidence intervals were based on models which presumed co2 causes warming.

Instead of now being a truthful intellectual and admitting to himself his argument is was and is again specious or even bogus.
He now doubles down like a true leftist pseudo intellectual.
Real intellectuals accept mistakes... they make bets about it and tell stories about it. They sort of laugh about themselves because they are confident in their own intellects. Sort of saying... who cares I am still the smartest person in the university.
 
Last edited:
futurecurrents said:
I'm saying that it's not volcanoes. It's the rising temperatures due the increasing greenhouse effect due to man. In addition, virtually all of the experts say that. Which is why I say it.

You think it's volcanoes. That's moronic.
More...
To think that is not attributable to volcanoes is moronic.

Do you think that magma or geothermal activity cannot melt ice?

Is there magma coming out of the volcano that is located underneath the glacier?
 
futurecurrents said:
Oh wow, that sounds so smart!! The peanut gallery of denier idiots approves!!

The models from twenty years ago are doing fine thanks. The greenhouse effect is well demonstrated and quantified. Temps are exactly within predicted ranges. It's impressive how well they have done. Although admittedly they did not consider ENSO enough. But they were never designed to measure short term variations. They are certainly validated as long term predictions and are getting better every year.

You see....CO2 is the earth's most important greenhouse gas. It's levels largely control the earth's temperature. We have raised it's level by 40% and continue to raise it's levels. Mankind has never lived with levels this high.
More...
Water vapor is by far the Earth's most important greenhouse gas. Forty percent of virtually nothing is still nothing.
 
piezoe said:
Water vapor is by far the Earth's most important greenhouse gas. Forty percent of virtually nothing is still nothing.
More...


Nope, CO2 is. There is difference between most powerful and most important. Unlike water vapor CO2 is a persistent GHG and so it's level leads and determines levels of the other important ghg, water vapor. Water vapor accentuates the effects of CO2.


The level of CO2 controls the temp of the earth. Without it the earth would be 30 - 50 degrees F colder. A 40% rise in it is most definitely something. Silly Libertarian.

All of this is easily confirmed by using something called Google.
 
Last edited:
WeToddDid2 said:
To think that is not attributable to volcanoes is moronic.

Do you think that magma or geothermal activity cannot melt ice?

Is there magma coming out of the volcano that is located underneath the glacier?
More...


The Greenland ice sheet is melting, on top. You know, where the warming air is. Look it up. Try Google. You do know how to use a search engine right? Please try to keep up.


Why do conservatives have so much trouble with rational thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top