Search results

About 200,000 years ago? But that's even meaningless, as humans capable of causing global changes have existed for far less time than the species Homo sapiens. Why should you be persuaded by a signature? I care not what your name is, I care about the quality of your work...

My father experimented with $hit on a shingle after he and mom parted ways. I never got past his first attempt, but I think I could give it a go now.

Yes...he explains his feelings, and that is all. He says we can look at geologic cycles and say bluntly that what we're witnessing is more of the same, despite the fact that the time scale is not geologic. Despite the logical fallacy that just because humans never existed before, does not mean...

LMAO, shoot the messenger when it doesn't tell you what you want ehh? Which temperature records were you using to assert that the globe has cooled? Anyways, the raw data is here: NASA and HadCRUT use the Global Historical Climate Network version 2. Satellite swath data is at the Cooperative...

Just in case anyone was wondering anyways, here's two satellite and two surface records for the last 10 years (monthly, so 120 samples). All trends are positive, though insignificant statistically:

LMAO... oh the irony...trying to get an answer out of Walter appears to be as difficult as getting one from Gore, a politician! :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Who said anything about confining? Your science guy is the one who apparently thinks 10 years is enough to provide useful climate information. It's not. Garbage. So according to you the company I work for (Big Pharma) selected me as the candidate because I support the consensus on immunization...

Some scientists in the 70's were talking about possible ice age because there was evidence that our pollution was going to help out what would be happening relatively soon, relative to geology... But that was only a handful of scientists, and they were correct about the science behind the...

It's not. It's only cooling if you confine yourself to the surface temperature record (and selected datasets!), and ignore: a) anything remotely related to variability b) statistical significance c) the energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere Go to skeptical science and see for yourself...

Cough Cough BULL $HIT! Most climate researchers know that climate is average thirty year weather, not ten years. Most climate researchers know what a signal to noise ratio means. Most climate researchers know that in no way does global warming require monotonic warming of the planet. Excuse...

"Deepening the apparent mystery, there is no magic fingerprint with which to identify industrially produced CO2 as volcanic CO2 is isotopically identical." This is complete bull plop. They have markedly different isotope fractions. Carbon dioxide from volcanoes has a δ13C value of about...

So what the hell does that have to do with the sun and what I said about thermodynamics? This is why I say spaghetti on a wall. You bounce back and forth between crazy and nonsensical, all the while claiming that something which is consistent is not. Spaghetti on a wall. I don't work in the...

Be sure to show how the oceans do not dwarf the land mass. The quantity we're concerned with here is heat capacity. Best of luck...

There is an outbreak in Vancouver of a deadly yet preventable disease, measles. Of the 14 cases in the last month, 10 are from one household who were not vaccinated and caught the disease from out of country visitors. Of the rest, none of them had the recommended two doses to provide the best...

Bump.

And the oceans dwarf terra firma. So what? The energy is coming in from the sun. But not in increasing amounts...not since the middle of this century anyways. To be sure, solar fluctuation plays a role, but very little right now. The Earth is warming because it's not in radiative balance. I...

Right...gliders don't find thermals...birds don't find thermals to ascend over mountain ranges. It's all electric levitation and fancy anti-gravity...:roll: It doesn't maintain it...otherwise we'd never have any rain now would we? Any idea how long the average cloud actually lasts after...

The cause you are concerned with is arguable. You're saying that clouds stay in the air because of an anti-gravity effect, despite known processes of convection, and despite any sort of explanation for cloud height limits. It's like you're throwing spaghetti at the wall hoping some will stick.

It does cool and condense as it rises...That doesn't mean that the convective process stops. Look up the saturated adiabatic lapse rate for yourself. Try explaining the Chinooks experienced in Alberta and other Foehn winds around the world without this known meteorological phenomenon.

Nothing that complicated is needed to explain how clouds form, and travel. Moist convection. Warm air carries moisture up into the atmosphere. As it rises and cools with the pressure drop, the vapour condenses into drops of water which coalesce into larger drops. This drag slows the ascent, and...