UK Met Office - 2014 NOT the hottest year ever

[gwb-trading]

I only need put the part of your unfounded assertions that contains the words "percentage of scientists supporting AGW in surveys performed in 2013 and 2014..." into Google to see what you say is just plain wrong and quite frankly, by most all other accounts, bullshit.

Find me a single survey of scientists performed in 2013 or 2014 which shows that 97% of scientists support AGW. Jem and I have posted multiple survey results on ET from the two recent years. All show just over half of scientists support AGW and the number drops each year as more scientific data comes out.

 

[gwb-trading]

What I said was, your comments are if anything, merely a demonstration of the scientific method working. The scientific case for AGW was made a long time ago and as yet, no other science, whether from Dr. Judith Curry or MIT or whomsoever, has been able to overthrow the science behind it. That is why such a vast majority of scientists support the science that shows AGW to be real and are not convinced scientifically to support claims to the contrary.

The case made by Judith Curry and others from leading scientific universities is that there is limited or no evidence to support AGW, and as every year moves along the evidence against AGW increases. There is no AGW science to "overthrow" - fundamentally when investigated by proper scientific method the evidence to support AGW does not exist.

 

[stu]

The case made by Judith Curry and others from leading scientific universities is that there is limited or no evidence to support AGW, and as every year moves along the evidence against AGW increases. There is no AGW science to "overthrow" - fundamentally when investigated by proper scientific method the evidence to support AGW does not exist.

Then how exactly is your argument not just a denial of the established empirical scientific evidence that overwhelmingly confirms AGW, along with a suggestion of conspiracy by the overwhelming consensus of scientists that confirm AGW.

 

[gwb-trading]

What!? So confusing! I thought everything the scientist on the GW side state was accurate, correct and factual.

 

[stu]

Find me a single survey of scientists performed in 2013 or 2014 which shows that 97% of scientists support AGW. Jem and I have posted multiple survey results on ET from the two recent years. All show just over half of scientists support AGW and the number drops each year as more scientific data comes out.

I've answered that.

Let's face it GWB , fundamentally you're just an anti AGW gif posting denial monkey

 

[gwb-trading]

Then how exactly is your argument not just a denial of the established empirical scientific evidence that overwhelmingly confirms AGW, along with a suggestion of conspiracy by the overwhelming consensus of scientists that confirm AGW.

You do realize that over half of the top 10 scientific universities in the U.S. do not support AGW. Do I need to once again append statements from the heads of their climate research departments.

 

[Ricter]

I've answered that.

Let's face it GWB , fundamentally you're just an anti AGW gif posting denial monkey

Lol

 

[Ricter]

You do realize that over half of the top 10 scientific universities in the U.S. do not support AGW. Do I need to once again append statements from the heads of their climate research departments.

Last week you were saying there were no climate research departments at top universities, and I proved you wrong.

 

[gwb-trading]

Last week you were saying there were no climate research departments at top universities, and I proved you wrong.

Go check the thread. I stated the Environmental Sciences department at many universities was not part of the School of Science - and I was proven perfectly correct. I never said that there were no climate research departments at top universities. Climate Research departments are totally different than Environmental Science programs.

Troll much?

 

[Ricter]

Go check the thread. I stated the Environmental Sciences department at many universities was not part of the School of Science - and I was proven perfectly correct. I never said that there were no climate research departments at top universities. Climate Research departments are totally different than Environmental Science programs.

Troll much?

"I stated the Environmental Sciences department at many universities was not part of the School of Science."
Thank you, I didn't catch then how unimportant this distinction is.

Got any cartoons ready?