Dunning Krueger effect writ large I'm afraid. With a healthy dose of Confirmation Bias thrown in to boot.
Do you really think that you know better than atmospheric scientists? Uh Huh, they are part of the conspiracy. You, however, who gets his information from denialist blogs are so much better informed!
I could blather on endlessly about long and short wave radiation and the difference that makes to energy balances but it ain't gonna make a blind bit of difference.
It really is interesting how most denialists use their own characteristics to reflect back on those who point out the errors of their BS. Words like "Faith" "Conspiracy" "Lack of Evidence" and "Brainwashing".
All while there are organisations out there that have documented agendas to distort the public's perception of the science. It appears that you are either heavily influenced by or work for one of them, since you've basically used every one of their talking points (all of which can be refuted by the science). It leads one to suspect that maybe you're a paid shill. If so, you forgot to mention growth in Antarctic sea ice extent, that it's the sun, no concensus etc etc.... I supose it was a bit too much to cover without being really obvious.
Oh BTW, you may want to look up ocean acidification if you think there are no problems with a 1000ppm CO2 level...also have a dip into transpiration effects of elevated CO2 levels on ground water uptake by plants.
PS I like the appeal to reason, "I'm not a crank because I don't believe in this other crank stuff" nice touch.
Sorry kid you've been brainwashed with the quasi religious belief that Anthropogenic CO2 is causing Global Warming and you don't know squat about the physics or chemistry of CO2 and the so called "green house effect". For example, Atmospheric CO2 only delays or captures about 8% of the infrared energy radiating from the earth. Over 90% of the infrared radiation passes right through the CO2 molecule. Sorry about your brainwashing but I'm a liberal who deals with evidence not nonsense. For example I'm not anti-Science. I happen to think that the anti-vaccine people are paranoid nut cases, and I think that teaching "intelligent design" is teaching religion. Did you happen to notice during the last 10 years that Winter weather "disasters" have happen in the rest of the world with scant coverage by the U.S. Global warming media propagandists. Winter Cold Weather Storms in both the northern and southern hemispheres have killed thousands of humans and their livestock in Mongolia,Northern Europe, Northern Russia and in South America. I can go on & on with facts, not fiction if you'd like. It took top "Scientists" at the time about 70 years to realize that the "missing link piltdown man skull" was a Hoax. There is absolutely no evidence that 400ppm-1000ppm atmospheric CO2 is detrimental to life on earth and that a CO2 tipping point has been reached. There is plenty of documented Scientific evidence that increased Atmospheric CO2 has caused increased Plant growth during the last 100 years. So the average temperature of Hailey Idaho is at least 3degreesF warmer than Sun Valley, Idaho. Does that mean that Hailey is an environmental disaster area? You got Faith, Kid, but you don't have evidence on your side.
Maybe the majority of Muslims are frustrated Catholics, since the preferred garb for women is a nun's habit.
The rabble need their distractions or they might pay attention to what's really going on around them.
C'est la vie!
Sounds to me like you've just disgorged pretty well every talking point put out by the Heartland Institute Et Al. It's hilarious (if it wasn't so egregious) how deniers (and I use that as a perjorative) have ACTUALLY been swindled by information put out by organisations who, by their own admission, have an aim to confuse and distort the science because of their ideology and to their financial advantage. And yet the same organisations claim that there is some kind of collective conspiracy, which includes pretty well every government and scientific agency in the world, to convince the world that there is a "non existent" problem.
Just some more factoids, since you seem to like picking cherries: You realise that the sea level has risen and dropped since the end of the last ice age, and is now on the way back up in tropical latitudes? You realise that scientists are worried about the rate of climate change, not the fact it is changing? And that scientists DON'T ingnore previous climate changes (just because you think and say that, doesn't make it true); There is a large amount of research into paleo-climate looking at the response of the climate to differing levels of green house gasses. That the Carboniferous period was called that because that's when the carbon was stored as coal? And that science is not some prescription carved into a stone tablet, if you want that level of "certainty" then I suggest you look up a certain book, in the mean time the science will keep improving as more data comes to hand. If the models weren't changing then there would be a problem.
But I could go on for pages with the science that refutes all your quasi scientific truthiness, but basically nothing would change your mind, it's about ideology- humans couldn't possibly affect the climate could they?, that would mean changing our behaviour, and think what that would do to the bottom line of the 1% who are telling you what to think.
ok ive never seen Rodman speak before? Was he completely loaded or is that normal?
"Good thing there are people like you Mick, to make sure all those stupid scientists are shown the errors of their ways. How obvious it is when you explain it so simply. How could they make such a basic error? Doh!"
The irony of your thoughts, Trev, is that today I read an article about the debate that is always on going and they even said that the most recent IPPC report that was released was already out dated because the climate models are changing.
When I saw that the climate models are changing that means that either the inputs or the algorhythms are changing. Yet if the supposed science was settled then how come the models have to be changed and updated constantly? Supposedly they are right but scientists, supposedly, are surprised that sea level changes are different than previously projected. They are surprised that ice levels on the caps are changing at different rates that previously projected. They didn't know that the Polar Vortex, or Canadian Clipper, that is nothing new, would dip down like this (as it has many times over history).
Also, a real scientist who is not blinded by his or her own bias KNOWS that the science on something of even modest complexity is never settled so how can this be? If it is settled then why change the models? According to them the models are right? I wonder if these are the same models, with updates, that when I was in grade school told the scientists that an ice age was upon us? Cripes, there was talk of spreading carbon black on the polar caps to try to trap heat so we wouldn't get so cold! Didn't they know about global warming gasses like CO2 and H2O? Those should have been in the models. Ask yourself what changed in the previous models that had them once predicting an ice age to suddenly predicting that we would warm instead? Why did they change the name of the issue from Global Warming to Climate Change? The climate always changes and nobody argues that point. The argument is the exaggeration of global warming and the assumption that man is the largest impactor.
The Earth has always cycled. During the grand millions of years of dinosaurs the temps were 7 to 10 degrees C hotter and the earth was covered with vegetation yet we are told that if things warm we have starvation, desertification, and plagues to look forward to. The warmer supporters act as if they speak with 100% certainty while changing their models and ignoring what the history of the planet is - much hotter many times than now, much cooler many times than now but suddenly man's CO2 output is the reason for the warming.
There's plenty of Scientists who disagree and there is plenty of Scientific evidence especially in the Geologic Record that is politically correct to ignore presently. I'll make it even simpler for you. Since the beginning of the end of the latest ice age about 20 thousand years ago, mean sea level has risen about 400 ft from melting glaciers and atmospheric temperature has warmed about 20degreesF. Scientifically documented and not anthropogenic. Daytime Climate is warmer the Nighttime Climate. Summer Climate is warmer than Winter Climate. Change in the amount of Solar Radiation or Change in the amount of atmospheric CO2? You Choose.
FOUR HORSEMEN is an award winning independent feature documentary which lifts the lid on how the world really works.
As we will never return to 'business as usual' 23 international thinkers, government advisors and Wall Street money-men break their silence and explain how to establish a moral and just society.
FOUR HORSEMEN is free from mainstream media propaganda -- the film doesn't bash bankers, criticise politicians or get involved in conspiracy theories. It ignites the debate about how to usher a new economic paradigm into the world which would dramatically improve the quality of life for billions.
"It's Inside Job with bells on, and a frequently compelling thesis thanks to Ashcroft's crack team of talking heads -- economists, whistleblowers and Noam Chomsky, all talking with candour and clarity." - Total Film
Good thing there are people like you Mick, to make sure all those stupid scientists are shown the errors of their ways. How obvious it is when you explain it so simply. How could they make such a basic error? Doh!
400ppm CO2=1 molecule of CO2 for 2500 Molecules of Atmosphere. CO2=Atmospheric Trace Gas unable to capture & delay a significant amount of infrared energy leaving the Earth. Atmospheric H20=95% of the Greenhouse Gas effect.
Spell check = garbage in = garbage out.
Excuse me. That's Pleistocene Ice Age and Pleistocene interglacial. Climate Models=Garbage in=Garbage out.
Read Peter Griffiths, 'Ethical Objections to Fairtrade' in Journal of Business Ethics
I dispute your claim that we are in the Plasticine Ice Age. I maintain we are just entering the Playdough Interglacial. The current Fimo period just shows the Flexibility of climate Models
Glad you noticed the cold. It doesn't get cold due to less atmospheric CO2. It gets cold due to less Solar Radiation. Despite all the apocalyptic Ballyhoo claiming Anthropogenic Global Warming the Earth is still in the Plasticine ice age and is on the verge of descending into the next 100 thousand year ice age cycle.
Could this be the most brilliant covert CIA operation to date?
Rodman needs to get his head outa his ass! He is easily influenced by perversion, as we all know. kudos to the other b-balls for helping THE STARVING PEOPLE OF NORTH KOREA get a few hours OUT OF SLAVE LABOR to watch your "game", here is your official pat on the back from humanity! Chaaaaaaaaaa
A pretty bizarre happening; how many CIAers are in the b-ball party? Seems like a perfect cover - the Rodman circus - to find out more about the Hermit Kingdom.
© 2017 Boise Weekly
Website powered by Foundation