‘Like a Terror Movie’: How Climate Change Will Cause More Simultaneous Disasters

here is a thousand peer reviewed papers questioning...

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

humlum... well known and well published has said you can attribute warming to natural causes.

many have stated the idea that man made co2 causes warming has not been established.

So stop lying you asswipe.

The nerve of you calling us liars and you perpetuate lies.



still, not a single quote from a publishing climate scientist denying or even questioning the basic truth of man made global warming.

because the consensus is not 97% its 100%

oh, and shut the fuck up jem
 
here is a thousand peer reviewed papers questioning...

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

humlum... well known and well published has said you can attribute warming to natural causes.

many have stated the idea that man made co2 causes warming has not been established.

So stop lying you asswipe.

The nerve of you calling us liars and you perpetuate lies.


What are you, fucking stupid and can't comprehend what you read?

still, not a single quote from a publishing climate scientist denying or even questioning the basic truth of man made global warming.

Come on, that one would stand out like sore thumb.


because the consensus is not 97% its 100%

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

oh, and shut the fuck up jem, you lying sack of shit.
 
You lying troll. fraud currents...
here is another list of scientists questioning the that man made co2 is causing warming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...th_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes
Graph showing the ability with which a global climate model is able to reconstruct the historical temperature record, and the degree to which those temperature changes can be decomposed into various forcing factors. It shows the effects of five forcing factors: greenhouse gases, man-made sulfate emissions, solar variability, ozone changes, and volcanic emissions.[80]
These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown
These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural.

Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences
These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment.

Deceased scientists
These scientists published material indicating their opposition to the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming prior to their deaths.














What are you, fucking stupid and can't comprehend what you read?

still, not a single quote from a publishing climate scientist denying or even questioning the basic truth of man made global warming.

Come on, that one would stand out like sore thumb.


because the consensus is not 97% its 100%

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

oh, and shut the fuck up jem, you lying sack of shit.
 
You lying troll. fraud currents...
here is another list of scientists questioning the that man made co2 is causing warming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...th_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes
Graph showing the ability with which a global climate model is able to reconstruct the historical temperature record, and the degree to which those temperature changes can be decomposed into various forcing factors. It shows the effects of five forcing factors: greenhouse gases, man-made sulfate emissions, solar variability, ozone changes, and volcanic emissions.[80]
These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown
These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural.

Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences
These scientists have said that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for society or the environment.

Deceased scientists
These scientists published material indicating their opposition to the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming prior to their deaths.




You really can't fucking read can you.

from a publishing climate scientist denying or even questioning the basic truth of man made global warming

The consensus is 100% among the experts.
 
Moron... just click on the links... many are published climate scientists.

But here at ET these are a few of the published climate scientists whose work you have discussed (not in a civil manner) in the past. This proves you are lying and not just ignorant.

Niv Shaviv... is one of Piezoes favorites. He has been discussed with you and he is published....

Ole Humlum - wrote the seminal peer reviewed paper which pretty much guts your theory. His paper shows us all that CO2 levels trail ocean warming and cooling.

John Christy works for NASA and is famous for his Satellite Temperature work for NASA.

David Legates is also published in peer reviewed papers.
He destroyed your Climate consensus fraud paper by cook.

There are others who are published.

If I recall Reid Bryson is one of the most cited climate scientists in literature.

Tim Paterson is another...

Patterson has made more than 300 scholarly contributions, including over 180 peer-reviewed journal publications and book chapters.[4] Patterson is also an international lecturer and media commentator, primarily contributing to increasing public awareness of environmental issues. He co-founded and served as Executive Editor (1997-2000) of Palaeontologia Electronica (PE).[5] Palaeontologia Electronica covers all aspects of palaeontology, and is the world's longest running open-access, peer-reviewed electronic journal. He also previously served as Associate Editor for the Journal of Foraminiferal Research (1995-2008),[6] and the journal Micropaleontology (1990-1997).[7]

Patterson works on a wide array of research subjects, most of which are based on analysis of marine and lake sediments to reconstruct past environments.[8] He uses many techniques to understand the history of marine and lake environments from the perspective of: 1) the influence of climate variability on aquatic ecosystem services (AES); 2) the impact of degradation resulting from human activities on AES, and 3) the degree to which remediation and mitigation efforts are successful in improving AES. He has developed technologies that permit extraction of very high-resolution paleoenvironmental records, and uses time series analysis techniques to recognize trends and cycles in the climate record. Other research focuses on assessing the impact of nutrient loading and road salt contamination on lake environments. He is also engaged in research on tracking the influence of climate change on metal transport in northern lakes and has partnered with indigenous peoples of the Northwest Territories to develop research tools to calibrate western scientific reconstructions of past climate against the oral histories that are provided by First Nations communities.[9]



You really can't fucking read can you.

from a publishing climate scientist denying or even questioning the basic truth of man made global warming

The consensus is 100% among the experts.
 
Last edited:
Moron... just click on the links... many are published climate scientists.

But here at ET these are a few of the published climate scientists whose work you have discussed (not in a civil manner) in the past. This proves you are lying and not just ignorant.

While you argue about papers etc real climate change is increasing the fire risks in California in recent years and creating massive flooding on many US coastline communities. Climate is changing and too many Americans ( including Trump ) aren't adapting to this reality. Trump is actually exasperating the problem by trying to roll back progress on controlling things like man made industrial pollutant. All this arguing is doing is distracting you from projects that help alleviate or minimize the results of environmental catastrophies and natural disasters. No one in their right mind would say the US was ready for the fires on the west coast and why is it that so many Americans still live ocean front in flood zones on the east coast ? There is very real evidence that builders and government have avoided sensible zoning to make a quick buck believing their faith in God or whatever will keep their communities dry.

Maybe funnel your energy into pollution controls, disaster preparations, and any reasonably priced project that helps makes sure man isn't exasperating climate change and ruining the environment. You might appreciate it if the big earthquake hits the west coast and sends a wall of water your way.
 
While you argue about papers etc real climate change is increasing the fire risks in California in recent years and creating massive flooding on many US coastline communities. Climate is changing and too many Americans ( including Trump ) aren't adapting to this reality. Trump is actually exasperating the problem by trying to roll back progress on controlling things like man made industrial pollutant. All this arguing is doing is distracting you from projects that help alleviate or minimize the results of environmental catastrophies and natural disasters. No one in their right mind would say the US was ready for the fires on the west coast and why is it that so many Americans still live ocean front in flood zones on the east coast ? There is very real evidence that builders and government have avoided sensible zoning to make a quick buck believing their faith in God or whatever will keep their communities dry.

Maybe funnel your energy into pollution controls, disaster preparations, and any reasonably priced project that helps makes sure man isn't exasperating climate change and ruining the environment. You might appreciate it if the big earthquake hits the west coast and sends a wall of water your way.

Canadian government gets 'failing grade' in climate change planning, says environment commissioner

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent...nning-says-environment-commissioner-1.4326499
 
Parisians are now rioting against the Paris climate accords

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...now-rioting-against-the-paris-climate-accords

In France all hell is breaking loose. Parisians, who live in the city of the climate accords that were supposed to save us all, are rioting. More than a quarter million protesters have taken to the streets to revolt against a rising fuel tax amid France's already exorbitant taxes.

Nearly half of France's gross domestic product is already eaten up by taxation. You might think that that frog has already been boiled, yet this environmentally inspired carbon tax proves otherwise. It is the straw that broke the camel's back.

Police deployed over 5,000 tear gas grenades and water cannons against the protesters, who donned yellow jackets for the second weekend in a row.
 
You really can't fucking read can you.

from a publishing climate scientist denying or even questioning the basic truth of man made global warming

The consensus is 100% among the experts.
The data negate increase in CO2 in the atmosphere as a hypothetical cause for the apparently observed global warming. A hypothesis of significant positive feedback by water vapor effect on atmospheric infrared absorption is also negated by the observed measurements. Apparently major revision of the physics underlying the greenhouse effect is needed."
P.S.: For purposes of your personal characterization: Miscolski fits the definition of "Publishing Climate Scientist."
 
Back
Top