The fish are just too easy to catch around here.
Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Now change the argument, but you still failed: it's not "bullshit" that the energy sector (which has just a bit of money) has been giving money to AGW denying scientists.
Indeed. Have any other easy to debunk claims to make?
you are just spitballing that specious idea. it was a nice try but you are completely full of shit. There have been many papers in which scientists attempted to show man made co2 causes warming. The problem is those papers had to resort to models (which have failed) because the data shows co2 levels trail warming and cooling.
if you read the science papers as they are coming out, you can tell they are not just falsifying the sun, the tides and other natural causes.
a. because they are learning that other natural causes could be the cause of some or all the warming and cooling.
b. they realize water vapor and other gases are far more powerful
c. co2 levels lag warming in the data.
d. they have learned that contrary to what their models "predicted" the environment has strong negative feedbacks.
In short you can't produce a list of scientists stating that man made co2 causes warming because those scientists realize there is no science saying man made co2 causes warming.
Its just speculation.
Finally, you can see there are papers which attempt to draw the nutter conclusion.
The recent ones focused on the idea that co2 could amplify natural warming by impacting clouds. However, even those papers turned out to be very speculative because further research seems to be showing that as we get warmer the increased cloud cover may s tend to be the cooling type clouds. (negative feedbacks again.)
if you read the science papers as they are coming out, you can tell they are not just falsifying the sun, the tides and other natural causes.
a. because they are learning that other natural causes could be the cause of some or all the warming and cooling.
b. they realize water vapor and other gases are far more powerful
c. co2 levels lag warming in the data.
d. they have learned that contrary to what their models "predicted" the environment has strong negative feedbacks.
In short you can't produce a list of scientists stating that man made co2 causes warming because those scientists realize there is no science saying man made co2 causes warming.
Its just speculation.
Finally, you can see there are papers which attempt to draw the nutter conclusion.
The recent ones focused on the idea that co2 could amplify natural warming by impacting clouds. However, even those papers turned out to be very speculative because further research seems to be showing that as we get warmer the increased cloud cover may s tend to be the cooling type clouds. (negative feedbacks again.)
Bill Gates: Carbon tax not right for the US
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/277526-bill-gates-carbon-tax-not-right-for-the-us
Microsoft founder Bill Gates says a carbon tax in the United States would not be an effective way of confronting climate change.
In an interview with the MIT Technology Review, Gates said the government and private sector should partner together to research more advanced and cleaner forms of energy. But a tax on carbon emissions — a move many Democrats and environmentalists have endorsed, which Gates has spoken about before — will not help the U.S. address climate change, he said.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/277526-bill-gates-carbon-tax-not-right-for-the-us
Microsoft founder Bill Gates says a carbon tax in the United States would not be an effective way of confronting climate change.
In an interview with the MIT Technology Review, Gates said the government and private sector should partner together to research more advanced and cleaner forms of energy. But a tax on carbon emissions — a move many Democrats and environmentalists have endorsed, which Gates has spoken about before — will not help the U.S. address climate change, he said.
Yada yada yada.
Hypothesis: volcanoes are causing global warming.
http://www.wired.com/2015/04/volcanoes-still-not-source-increasing-carbon-dioxide-atmosphere/
Want more?
what the heck are you talking about?
1. ridiculous takeaway from that paper. Which showed that volcanoes put out a significant amount of co2. Which by the way has nothing to do with our argument here.
2. you made the spectrum comment. I pointed out that your end of the sprectrum seems empty... since you not produced any peer reviewed science or even a list of scientists who state man made co2 causes warming.
your response implied that the reasons you have no science or scientists was because they were falsifying other hypothetical causes.
I pointed out they were also trying to prove the hypothesis and failed.
Your response about volcanoes as weak as it is does not explain why you can't produce a list of scientists stating man made co2 causes warming.
1. ridiculous takeaway from that paper. Which showed that volcanoes put out a significant amount of co2. Which by the way has nothing to do with our argument here.
2. you made the spectrum comment. I pointed out that your end of the sprectrum seems empty... since you not produced any peer reviewed science or even a list of scientists who state man made co2 causes warming.
your response implied that the reasons you have no science or scientists was because they were falsifying other hypothetical causes.
I pointed out they were also trying to prove the hypothesis and failed.
Your response about volcanoes as weak as it is does not explain why you can't produce a list of scientists stating man made co2 causes warming.
The causation has been observed by satellites, detecting the change in Earth's emitted energy spectrum consistent with greenhouse gases increasing in the atmosphere. That's the direct evidence (along with direct measurements of CO2 molecules becoming more energetic when exposed to certain long wave radiation). The indirect evidence is the continuing debunking of alternative hypotheses.
Now produce some peer-reviewed work that shows this process is not the best process.
the causation has not been observed.
we don't even know the earth has warmed outside natural variation.
you are citing properties of co2 in sort of a vacuum not in our earths system of positive and negative feedbacks.
the greenhouse spectrum stuff is not evidence that adding man made co2 is currently causing the planet to warm. remember co2 also causes cooling... and that we don't even know that man made co2 is anthing to do with rising levels of co2 since there is nothing saying we are living in a closed system.
its the net impact of adding co2 and particularly man made co2 that is the science we need and you side has not produced.
we don't even know the earth has warmed outside natural variation.
you are citing properties of co2 in sort of a vacuum not in our earths system of positive and negative feedbacks.
the greenhouse spectrum stuff is not evidence that adding man made co2 is currently causing the planet to warm. remember co2 also causes cooling... and that we don't even know that man made co2 is anthing to do with rising levels of co2 since there is nothing saying we are living in a closed system.
its the net impact of adding co2 and particularly man made co2 that is the science we need and you side has not produced.
You see, CO2 is like the glass in a greenhouse. And the deniers are like the plants growing in the greenhouse. And the water is like the right wing propaganda and their fertilizer is manure.