Are they though? Honestly curious what your source is.
UN Says Climate Genocide Is Coming. It’s Actually Worse Than That.
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
Are they though? Honestly curious what your source is.
The 2014 poll published in the American Meteorological Society (It's in the Bulletin rather than the regular Journal). It's available free.
What complete think tank bullshit. How much do they pay you to spew this crap? Did you do tobacco also?
Your "atmospheric scientists" are weathermen. Like TV weathermen. Like not CLIMATE scientists. And it was one survey worded along partisan lines and was not about the truth of man made climate change. But even they were more qualified to speak than you. Electro expert. What an intellectually dishonest thing to say. If you don't know better than this you must be much stupider than we thought you were.
And now? Not even TV weathermen are this stupid anymore. But you are. Why..... expert in every field? Look we'll get back to if we have a piezoe electrical problem.
No, none, zero, publishing CLIMATE scientists deny man made global warming.
And this chart shows one reason why. .Remember piehole.......CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Does any of this make sense to you? It's not electric stuff.
Last edited:
Not the most confident inspiring endorsement, no offense
Meteorologists are best known by the public for weather forecasting. Some radio and television weather forecasters are professional meteorologists, while others are reporters (weather specialist, weatherman, etc.) with no formal meteorological training. The American Meteorological Society and National Weather Association issue "Seals of Approval" to weather broadcasters who meet certain requirements.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00091.1
This may be easier to read than the sideways version.
Note the lack of any direct reference to the Hansen hypothesis or CO2 as the cause. Most people will assume that those responding that global warming is happening and the cause is mostly human are accepting that the Hansen Hypothesis is correct. In any case the results are far from what we are led to believe by the mainstream media. Imagine if 22% of physical scientists (one out of five) did not accept the second law of thermodynamics as correct! Would we still accept it as proven correct?.
I recommend consulting the original manuscript, available free, for more information.
Last edited:
https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.c...tatements-of-the-ams-in-force/climate-change/
[This statement is considered in force until August 2018 unless superseded by a new statement issued by the AMS Council before this date.]
There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research. The observed warming will be irreversible for many years into the future, and even larger temperature increases will occur as greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere. Avoiding this future warming will require a large and rapid reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions. The ongoing warming will increase risks and stresses to human societies, economies, ecosystems, and wildlife through the 21st century and beyond, making it imperative that society respond to a changing climate. To inform decisions on adaptation and mitigation, it is critical that we improve our understanding of the global climate system and our ability to project future climate through continued and improved monitoring and research. This is especially true for smaller (seasonal and regional) scales and weather and climate extremes, and for important hydroclimatic variables such as precipitation and water availability.
Climate is always changing. However, many of the observed changes noted above are beyond what can be explained by the natural variability of the climate. It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide. The most important of these over the long term is CO2, whose concentration in the atmosphere is rising principally as a result of fossil-fuel combustion and deforestation. While large amounts of CO2 enter and leave the atmosphere through natural processes, these human activities are increasing the total amount in the air and the oceans. Approximately half of the CO2 put into the atmosphere through human activity in the past 250 years has been taken up by the ocean and terrestrial biosphere, with the other half remaining in the atmosphere. Since long-term measurements began in the 1950s, the atmospheric CO2 concentration has been increasing at a rate much faster than at any time in the last 800,000 years. Having been introduced into the atmosphere it will take a thousand years for the majority of the added atmospheric CO2 to be removed by natural processes, and some will remain for thousands of subsequent years.
[This statement is considered in force until August 2018 unless superseded by a new statement issued by the AMS Council before this date.]
There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research. The observed warming will be irreversible for many years into the future, and even larger temperature increases will occur as greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere. Avoiding this future warming will require a large and rapid reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions. The ongoing warming will increase risks and stresses to human societies, economies, ecosystems, and wildlife through the 21st century and beyond, making it imperative that society respond to a changing climate. To inform decisions on adaptation and mitigation, it is critical that we improve our understanding of the global climate system and our ability to project future climate through continued and improved monitoring and research. This is especially true for smaller (seasonal and regional) scales and weather and climate extremes, and for important hydroclimatic variables such as precipitation and water availability.
Climate is always changing. However, many of the observed changes noted above are beyond what can be explained by the natural variability of the climate. It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide. The most important of these over the long term is CO2, whose concentration in the atmosphere is rising principally as a result of fossil-fuel combustion and deforestation. While large amounts of CO2 enter and leave the atmosphere through natural processes, these human activities are increasing the total amount in the air and the oceans. Approximately half of the CO2 put into the atmosphere through human activity in the past 250 years has been taken up by the ocean and terrestrial biosphere, with the other half remaining in the atmosphere. Since long-term measurements began in the 1950s, the atmospheric CO2 concentration has been increasing at a rate much faster than at any time in the last 800,000 years. Having been introduced into the atmosphere it will take a thousand years for the majority of the added atmospheric CO2 to be removed by natural processes, and some will remain for thousands of subsequent years.
Not one peer reviewed paper has been produced which states man made co2 is causing warming.
Yet there are over 1,000 peer reviewed papers showing that the Sun and the tides, water vapor and clouds do impact global temperature.
Science is not made by "consensus". Any group or person which / who argues science is found by consensus is the scientific equivalent of Satan.
If you wish to claim science... show the science.
Yet there are over 1,000 peer reviewed papers showing that the Sun and the tides, water vapor and clouds do impact global temperature.
Science is not made by "consensus". Any group or person which / who argues science is found by consensus is the scientific equivalent of Satan.
If you wish to claim science... show the science.
If you look at the data that goes into your chart you will see that warming leads co2 levels up and down.
You have been told that before.
Why do you keep lying?
You have been told that before.
Why do you keep lying?
What complete think tank bullshit. How much do they pay you to spew this crap? Did you do tobacco also?
Your "atmospheric scientists" are weathermen. Like TV weathermen. Like not CLIMATE scientists. And it was one survey worded along partisan lines and was not about the truth of man made climate change. But even they were more qualified to speak than you. Electro expert. What an intellectually dishonest thing to say. If you don't know better than this you must be much stupider than we thought you were.
And now? Not even TV weathermen are this stupid anymore. But you are. Why..... expert in every field? Look we'll get back to if we have a piezoe electrical problem.
No, none, zero, publishing CLIMATE scientists deny man made global warming.
And this chart shows one reason why. .Remember piehole.......CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Does any of this make sense to you? It's not electric stuff.
This may be easier to read than the sideways version.
Note the lack of any direct reference to the Hansen hypothesis or CO2 as the cause. Most people will assume that those responding that global warming is happening and the cause is mostly human are accepting that the Hansen Hypothesis is correct. In any case the results are far from what we are led to believe by the mainstream media. Imagine if 22% of physical scientists (one out of five) did not accept the second law of thermodynamics as correct! Would we still accept it as proven correct?.
I recommend consulting the original manuscript, available free, for more information.
The Hansen hypothesis? You keep throwing it around to ad hom and diminish the argument as a good think tank worker would do.
Maybe you mean the greenhouse effect? Is that not a real thing either?
Seriously piehole. WTF is wrong with you?
Last edited: