Where Did Global Warming Go?

[futurecurrents]

 

[377OHMS]

Quote from futurecurrents:

No. You don't cognitive ability. If you did you would agree with the 97% of climate scientists that DO have cognitive ability. No, all you have is your feverish rabid rigid right ideology and a stubborn stupidity. You are judging science by politics, which is dumb.

I'm judging an AC installer who thinks he is familiar with scientific methods and who harbors the determination of a religious zealot to destroy the lives of those around him. Y'know... a putz who cannot discern the difference between GW and AGW and uses results interchangeably while proclaiming "I really love graphs".

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from futurecurrents:

No. You don't cognitive ability...

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from jem:

NASA Global Warming Stance Blasted By 49 Astronauts, Scientists Who Once Worked At Agency


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/nasa-global-warming-letter-astronauts_n_1418017.html


Is NASA playing fast and loose with climate change science? That's the contention of a group of 49 former NASA scientists and astronauts.

On March 28 the group sent a letter to NASA administrator Charles Bolden, Jr., blasting the agency for making unwarranted claims about the role of carbon dioxide in global warming, Business Insider reported.

"We believe the claims by NASA and GISS [NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies], that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data," the group wrote. "With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled."

The group features some marquee names, including Michael F. Collins, Walter Cunningham and five other Apollo astronauts, as well as two former directors of NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston.

The letter included a request for NASA to refrain from mentioning CO2 as a cause of global warming in future press releases and websites. The agency's "Global Climate Change" webpage says that "Humans have increased atmospheric CO2 concentration by a third since the Industrial Revolution began. This is the most important long-lived "forcing" of climate change."

I'll bet you go to the dentist for heart surgery. Oh wait, that's the barber right? LOL

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from 377OHMS:

I'm judging an AC installer who thinks he is familiar with scientific methods and who harbors the determination of a religious zealot to destroy the lives of those around him. Y'know... a putz who cannot discern the difference between GW and AGW and uses results interchangeably while proclaiming "I really love graphs".

Ah yes, of course, talking about AGW and moving to reduce CO2 emissions is all about destroying lives.

Time for your meds. BTW you DO know CO2 is a greenhouse gas right?

You guys crack me up. You're just too smart to believe the obvious. LOL.

 

[377OHMS]

Quote from futurecurrents:

Ah yes, of course, talking about AGW and moving to reduce CO2 emissions is all about destroying lives.

Time for your meds. BTW you DO know CO2 is a greenhouse gas right?

You guys crack me up. You're just too smart to believe the obvious. LOL.

Its only *obvious* to those who worship at the altar of technological regression and whom wish to use a non-issue to redistribute wealth and income among those who did not earn it. You want to take the property of others because you could not obtain it via your own limited means. Its about money and we both know it. You don't know CO2 from your elbow and you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone qualified to discuss it with you. Its like discussing evolution with the mailman.

 

[jem]

Quote from futurecurrents:

I'll bet you go to the dentist for heart surgery. Oh wait, that's the barber right? LOL

thats right... your science was just refuted and your charge that all the scientists agree was just destroyed.

so now you change the subject like a troll.

 

[jem]

here is the science and here are the scientists.

Quote from jem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

this is a partial list....

Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections

Scientists in this section have made comments that it is not possible to project global climate accurately enough to justify the ranges projected for temperature and sea-level rise over the next century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global climate modeling.


Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society [9]
Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences[10]
Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003), and author of books supporting the validity of dowsing[11]
Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow ANU[12]
Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London[13]
Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute [14]
Scientists arguing that global warming is primarily caused by natural processes



Scientists in this section have made comments that the observed warming is more likely attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

Khabibullo Abdusamatov, mathematician and astronomer at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences[16]
Sallie Baliunas, astronomer, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[17][18]
Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[19]
Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland[20]
David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester[21]
Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University[22]
William M. Gray, professor emeritus and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University[23]
William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy, Princeton University[24]
William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology[25]
David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware[26]
Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[27]
Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.[28][29]
Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of Mining Geology, the University of Adelaide.[30]
Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University[31][32]
Tom Segalstad, head of the Geology Museum at the University of Oslo[33]
Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia[34][35][36]
Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[37]
Roy Spencer, principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville[38]
Henrik Svensmark, Danish National Space Center[39]
Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa[40]


Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown

Scientists in this section have made comments that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.
Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks[41]
Claude Allègre, politician; geochemist, Institute of Geophysics (Paris)[42]
Robert C. Balling, Jr., a professor of geography at Arizona State University[43]
John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC[44][45]
Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory[46]
Judith Curry, Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology[47]
David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma[48]
Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists[49]
Scientists arguing that global warming will have few negative consequences

Scientists in this section have made comments that projected rising temperatures will be of little impact or a net positive for human society and/or the Earth's environment. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.


Craig D. Idso, faculty researcher, Office of Climatology, Arizona State University and founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change [50]
Sherwood Idso, former research physicist, USDA Water Conservation Laboratory, and adjunct professor, Arizona State University[51]
Patrick Michaels, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and retired research professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia[52]

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from jem:

thats right... your science was just refuted and your charge that all the scientists agree was just destroyed.

so now you change the subject like a troll.

No you just gave me the names of ASTRONAUTS that disagree. 98% of CLIMATOLOGISTS are in agreement about the basic science of AGW.
There is not a single science organization in the world that denies it.


Note ASTRONAUTS, ENGINEERS, even PHYSICISTS and certainly not GEOPHYSICISTS or DENTISTS are NOT the same as CLIMATOLOGISTS. There seems to be some confusion among the denier morons about this.

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from 377OHMS:

Its only *obvious* to those who worship at the altar of technological regression and whom wish to use a non-issue to redistribute wealth and income among those who did not earn it. You want to take the property of others because you could not obtain it via your own limited means. Its about money and we both know it. You don't know CO2 from your elbow and you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone qualified to discuss it with you. Its like discussing evolution with the mailman.

Once again you prove that you look at the science through your myopic and distorted political peephole. That's not how science works. That's how your fanatical brain works.

It must disturb you that you are being out-argued about science by a mechanic. You seem to always need to prop up your ego with statements about how great you are. It's actually quite pathetic.