Global warming LOL (part 3) -Scientist admit they were wrong
- Thread starter John_Wensink
- Start date
We had this information twenty years ago, we knew this all the time we had to put up with the flaming alarmists and their bullshit stories about GW.. We have the information that what are interpreted as many years on the ice cores are intraday, we have the information that the Antarctic added hundreds of feet of ice since WW2...
Anything that is directly observable doesn't cut it with these "science" assholes, they love the stuff that's all dreamy and based on dreamland assumptions...
I'm not trying to be friends, though that is nice. I'm pleading for reason and restraint in regard to this issue. Let's let science and observation decide this issue, not politics and hubris. By the way some folks here hate me. Leapup hates me because I kidded about the possibility that Jesus was gay, (I do believe it is a distinct possibility based on the Bible's account of him, assuming there was a Jesus, but how would I know?); and zdreg is convinced I am an evil communist. I find all of this highly entertaining and enjoy bantering with all of you during otherwise dull periods.
Along with virtually the entire world's science community and anyone with at least half a brain and who can put two and two together. I guess you're not in that category. Too bad.
I can you assure of this much with absolute certainty, and that is that there is at minimum one scientist who can put two and two together that is neither certain that man's activity has caused "almost all the warming over the past 50 years," nor even thinks it is likely.
You, yourself, quoted the hedged language from the IPCC, viz, "...is very likely..." rather than "... is..." . That suggests there may be more than one.
My personal position, at the moment, is that the arguments for GW over the last 50 years are compelling, while those for AGW are much less so.
"My personal position, at the moment, is that the arguments for GW over the last 50 years are compelling"Quote from piezoe:
I can you assure of this much with absolute certainty, and that is that there is at minimum one scientist who can put two and two together that is neither certain that man's activity has caused "almost all the warming over the past 50 years," nor even thinks it is likely.
You, yourself, quoted the hedged language from the IPCC, viz, "...is very likely..." rather than "... is..." . That suggests there may be more than one.
My personal position, at the moment, is that the arguments for GW over the last 50 years are compelling, while those for AGW are much less so.
On account of the ice melting and all? ; )