lawrocket 3 #126 September 27, 2013 ChrisD "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal Over the past few hundred years? I agree. [Quote]and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. "Over decades to millenia" - that's not a term to breed confidence. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, Over the last 15k years? Oh, yes. Over the last 8k years? Probably not. Over the last 800 years? Possibly. Over the last 150 years? Yes. Over the last 80 years? Probably. Over the last 15 years? I disagree. [Quote]the amounts of snow and ice have diminished Yes. That's called 'interglacial." And the rate of ice loss has slowed dramatically over the last few thousand years. [Quote]sea level has risen No shit. That's called "interglacial." The issue is whether the sea level rise is accelerating. The data we have suggests that it isn't, and the places where it's the biggest threat are where the interglacial rebound is causing land to subside. Look at the trend of increasing sea level. Where's is take us? [Quote] and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased" Yes. And yet temps haven't increased for over 15 years though AGW gases have increased. That's a big huge problem for causation when correlation is problematic. [Reply]Over 250 very well educated individuals with out any vested interest have come to the following conclusion.... No vested interest? Like their jobs? The IPCC mission statement provides that its mission is to deal with strategies for AGW. If there was an organization whose mission was to propose strategies for dealing with zombie apocalypse, I assure you they'd provide those strategies to mitigate the risk or to manage it. [Reply]And you dismiss this by saying that they "lie." No. I point out that there's a great deal of cognitive dissonance in their report. How can you be more certain about the effects and yet increase the margin of the predicted effects? Hiw can you say that a 10-15 year trend of no warming is "natural variability" but that the AGW gases overcome natural variability? How does one say a "10-15 year" trend is natural variability? What about a 17 year trend? They didn't approach it. [Reply]Who the fuck are you??? Someone who looks at evidence and the foundations. Somebody that thinks that it's time to address the tough issues. To address that my kids have not seen warming. To address that there isn't a high schooler who has lived through a Cat 5 hurricane. Etc. But to ask a question, are there people that are unqualified to ask questions? Really. Serious question. Are the people with the IPCC so lofty as to be beyond answering questions? They are Gods. All knowing, right. [Quote]Go eat some more doughnuts.... I shall. I'm passing up the Kool-Aid. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisD 0 #127 November 6, 2013 Just the latest news from these liers... Ostrich C Personally I cut and past some of these news reports cause they tend to disappear.... But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #128 November 6, 2013 ChrisD Just the latest news from these liers... Ostrich C Personally I cut and past some of these news reports cause they tend to disappear.... Liars? Who is denying that CO2 is over 400 ppm? We have actual OBSERVATIONS to confirm it. We also have actual OBSERVATIONS showing that there isn't even much of a correlation between increasing CO2 level and temperature. It's the whole "last 18 years" thing. You are right - the planet is acting like an ostrich. While you and others hope and wish and pray for scorching temperatures, Mother Earth is being an uppity bitch and just not cooperating. Sure, the science is pretty damned solid. Just as solid as "water boils at exactly 212 degrees F." My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
