Global Warming: still the ‘Greatest Scam in History’

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
46
48
66
Half the dose of what it takes to kill.

10g - 13.2g/kg of drywall to kill a drywaller. Cellulose(LD50 5gr/kg) will kill before potassium sulphate or starch (both LD50 6.6gr/kg).

Har!
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
I don't even think he's on TV anymore.

It matters not.Your attempted celebrity association withyour mission will not sway the tribunals deliberations , you name dropper you.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
Help, waldo

Walter! It was your task to substantiate your claim that there has been no increase in extreme weather associated with increased warming/climate change. Is this... that... your evidence? :mrgreen: It seems we left off with the following post from a couple of weeks ago... but is this post of yours the best you could come up in a couple weeks period?
Walter! Does this latest distraction of yours mean you've dropped your pretense over there being no such thing as an increase in extreme weather over the relative recent decade(s)? Aren't you wanting to share your, as you called it, "proof" (actually evidence, right Walter?)? Is there a problem for you Walter?

but good on ya for recognizing your latest Michigan state focused link is... yes, weather! Good on ya!.

here's a couple of graphs... one climate focused with a long-term temperature trend for Michigan state, one not. But hey now, in keeping with your latest weather focus for Michigan, look at that bottom graph and tell me Walter... what colour is the state of Michigan and what does that colour equate to? As you say Walter, good thing it's only weather! :lol:


Walter, yes... since you asked for my help! First things first: do some research and find out the prevailing view on tornadoes... and whether or not they were/are expected to increase in either number or intensity. Please come back and post your findings - thanks in advance.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
Help, waldo!

Walter!!! You just repeated the same link you provided in your first post! You didn't take my assignment seriously, at all... here, try it again:
First things first: do some research and find out the prevailing view on tornadoes... and whether or not they were/are expected to increase in either number or intensity. Please come back and post your findings - thanks in advance.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,871
116
63
Walter!!! You just repeated the same link you provided in your first post! You didn't take my assignment seriously, at all... here, try it again:

I've lost all faith in you, waldo. I guess there is no AGW or ACC. You must not believe in it either if you couldn't explain the contradictory evidence. Such as shame as you had me completely converted to your side and now I find out it's all a scam. You are just another low-information drone for the left.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
I've lost all faith in you, waldo. I guess there is no AGW or ACC. You must not believe in it either if you couldn't explain the contradictory evidence. Such as shame as you had me completely converted to your side and now I find out it's all a scam. You are just another low-information drone for the left.

Walter... I can't work miracles, particularly with those (like you) who refuse to first help themselves! For the 3rd time, your assignment is:
Walter, yes... since you asked for my help! First things first: do some research and find out the prevailing view on tornadoes... and whether or not they were/are expected to increase in either number or intensity. Please come back and post your findings - thanks in advance.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
Been a long time since we had warming.
No global warming for 18 years, 1 month

Walter!!! ... your article... that's from Lawdy Monckton. Have you no shame? :mrgreen: How come the RSS dataset has suddenly become the favoured darling of deniers, hey?


The truth means nothing to believers.

taxi, where's your questioning of what Walter just put forward? Do you just accept "that truth" blindly, openly and most willingly? What kind of a skeptic are you taxi... oh, that's right... you're the fake kind!

as I said to Walter, as I'll ask you... why has the RSS dataset, in relatively recent times, become the favoured go-to dataset of deniers, like you? Member 'Tonington' gave a teaser a short while back... you must have missed it or I'm sure you would have looked into it, right?
Another fun bit is the difference between the RSS and UAH satellite data.
RSS has become an outlier compared to all other temperature measurement datasets (most particularly since mid 2011)... and why is that? Well, far be it from me to leverage the likes of "skeptics" Christy/Spencer, but they do hold the UAH reigns:
Uncle Roy Spencer said:
Anyway, my UAH cohort and boss John Christy, who does the detailed matching between satellites, is pretty convinced that the RSS data is undergoing spurious cooling because RSS is still using the old NOAA-15 satellite which has a decaying orbit, to which they are then applying a diurnal cycle drift correction based upon a climate model, which does not quite match reality. We have not used NOAA-15 for trend information in years…we use the NASA Aqua AMSU, since that satellite carries extra fuel to maintain a precise orbit.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
113,481
12,858
113
Low Earth Orbit
Walter... I can't work miracles, particularly with those (like you) who refuse to first help themselves! For the 3rd time, your assignment is:


Don't you have a 90 page paper to read?



What is with the chart going back to 1880? It was the sun causing global warming until just 30 years ago. The sun doesn' t heat the planet anymore.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
Don't you have a 90 page paper to read?

no - see, here's the diff: I gave Walter a most precise assignment, one clearly laid out... one that, if he was inclined, he could resolve in very short order with a few googlies. Your go-fetch routine is to drop an assortment of links without any accompanying measure of just what you're presuming to state/claim in relation to the links. You revel in your purposeful vagueness! Am I going to chow-down on a "90 page paper" you blindly reference to... just because YOU think it has meaning in regards something only YOU are privy to... no, sorry, not now, not ever.
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
Questions: what premise are you presuming to speak to in regards warming through the various atmospheric layers, particularly as may reflect upon the relatively recent warming of the earth over the last 50-60 years or so? Does this mean you're shifting your alternate grab-bag attention away from geothermal, away from the magic of "coming out of the LIA", away from sunspots, away from GSRs, away from....... just what is this, your latest premise?
 

waldo

House Member
Oct 19, 2009
3,042
0
36
It all relates.

that's deep! By the by, have you ever taken the time/effort to lay it all out... to, as you say, "relate it all"... to tie all those alternate pet theories of yours together in a cohesive manner? :mrgreen:

Walter... why did you give me a reddie for this post: I'm simply quoting from Uncle Roy... the very guy you presume to leverage within your OP! C'mon Walter... surely you're not a selective advocate of Uncle Roy's! Are you? :mrgreen: