1. Natural Global Warming is a fact?
-no its troll deception... you gave no science
-our current temperature is within the natural range the earth has been cycling through for millions of years.
-So however you define your terms... it will be misleading.
2. Man made global warming is far from a fact.
Here you again just make shit up.
a. using the best statistical methods you can not show current temps are outside natural variability.
b. there is no science showing man made co2 is causing warming on earth. We have complicated dynamic systems. you are using simplistic thinking. You need to think in systems backed with science. not ipcc slogans.
The IPCC and others were relying on models to show that man made co2 causes warming... those models failed to predict the lack of warming we have had for the past 16 years.
In short there is no science showing co2 is causing warming on earth. That is fact.
3. finally your representation of is a joke...
the 97% number was a quote taken from a debunked datamined survey.
David R. Legates, Willie Soon, William M. Briggs, Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-013-9647-9
Abstract
Agnotology is the study of how ignorance arises via circulation of misinformation calculated to mislead. Legates et al. (Sci Educ 22:2007â2017, 2013) had questioned the applicability of agnotology to politically-charged debates. In their reply, Bedford and Cook (Sci Educ 22:2019â2030, 2013), seeking to apply agnotology to climate science, asserted that fossil-fuel interests had promoted doubt about a climate consensus. Their definition of climate âmisinformationâ was contingent upon the post-modernist assumptions that scientific truth is discernible by measuring a consensus among experts, and that a near unanimous consensus exists. However, inspection of a claim by Cook et al. (Environ Res Lett 8:024024, 2013) of 97.1 % consensus, heavily relied upon by Bedford and Cook, shows just 0.3 % endorsement of the standard definition of consensus: that most warming since 1950 is anthropogenic. Agnotology, then, is a two-edged sword since either side in a debate may claim that general ignorance arises from misinformation allegedly circulated by the other. Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain. Therefore, Legates et al. appropriately asserted that partisan presentations of controversies stifle debate and have no place in education.
-no its troll deception... you gave no science
-our current temperature is within the natural range the earth has been cycling through for millions of years.
-So however you define your terms... it will be misleading.
2. Man made global warming is far from a fact.
Here you again just make shit up.
a. using the best statistical methods you can not show current temps are outside natural variability.
b. there is no science showing man made co2 is causing warming on earth. We have complicated dynamic systems. you are using simplistic thinking. You need to think in systems backed with science. not ipcc slogans.
The IPCC and others were relying on models to show that man made co2 causes warming... those models failed to predict the lack of warming we have had for the past 16 years.
In short there is no science showing co2 is causing warming on earth. That is fact.
3. finally your representation of is a joke...
the 97% number was a quote taken from a debunked datamined survey.
David R. Legates, Willie Soon, William M. Briggs, Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-013-9647-9
Abstract
Agnotology is the study of how ignorance arises via circulation of misinformation calculated to mislead. Legates et al. (Sci Educ 22:2007â2017, 2013) had questioned the applicability of agnotology to politically-charged debates. In their reply, Bedford and Cook (Sci Educ 22:2019â2030, 2013), seeking to apply agnotology to climate science, asserted that fossil-fuel interests had promoted doubt about a climate consensus. Their definition of climate âmisinformationâ was contingent upon the post-modernist assumptions that scientific truth is discernible by measuring a consensus among experts, and that a near unanimous consensus exists. However, inspection of a claim by Cook et al. (Environ Res Lett 8:024024, 2013) of 97.1 % consensus, heavily relied upon by Bedford and Cook, shows just 0.3 % endorsement of the standard definition of consensus: that most warming since 1950 is anthropogenic. Agnotology, then, is a two-edged sword since either side in a debate may claim that general ignorance arises from misinformation allegedly circulated by the other. Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain. Therefore, Legates et al. appropriately asserted that partisan presentations of controversies stifle debate and have no place in education.
