Humans Are Changing the Climate 170x Faster Than Natural Forces

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister

 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
I've read several times that the only desert in Canada is a very small area around Osoyoos, but I've also read that the place with the least precipitation in B.C. is Ashcroft with 6" a year. So why one is a desert and the other isn't I'm not sure. I guess precipitation isn't the only criteria for identifying a desert!

It's pretty dry around Kamloops and around Medicine Hat, as I recall.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,011
14,445
113
Low Earth Orbit
Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Ice free north pole since 2013.

.... 'Nuff said



The world needs ditch diggers too



Really makes you wonder how people in nations without free unlimited healthcare survive, let alone how humanity ever got this far without health insurance don't it?
I got the same memo so a used my retirement fund to get some beach from property on the Hudson Bay as it will be the new Med. Slight delay unless you want to use a sleigh to get there.
Just sayin, . . .

The reason for so many ditches is what??

Need I point out that there are people there so they did not go extinct without our health care system. What's up with that?
What it makes me wonder is why the 6th largest killer in North America kills only those who are under 5 or over 65. In layman's terms it it s persistent cold. What's up with that??

Table 3 - Ranking and number of deaths for the 10 leading causes by age group, Canada, 2007

Way to go, Boomer. You brought all of the nut cases out of their closets again.
One would have thought you would rather not be the only one of 'those people' on the loose here.
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,262
113
Olympus Mons
1. That number is probably wrong
2. You don't know how many in that field the dissenters represent
3. There is likely a range of opinions
4. Unlike AGW, there was no foundation for consensus based on evidence because you were dealing with theory



Sorry that you're just as dumb as petros but allow me to explain why..

You don't look at the entire body of climate science, just the research relating to questions about why it's happening.
Fun Facts:
1)Carbon dioxide progressively loses the ability to absorb heat as its concentration increases.
2)Man-made warming theory relies on water vapor, not carbon dioxide, to drive future warming.
3)Cloud formation contradicts this water vapor feedback.
4)Climate scientists have never solved this cloud problem.
5)Solar activity in the 20th Century increased to its highest levels in at least 2,000 years.
6)Every previous warm period over the past few thousands of years coincided with strong solar output.

So sorry to bounce it back to you, but the dumb one truly is you. See #1? It's been proven time and time again. THAT'S science.

Now, as for this dreck
1. That number is probably wrong
Nope, it's 97% of 33%. I've done the math. You'll have to trust me on that since I know the logic of math seems to elude you.
2. You don't know how many in that field the dissenters represent
It doesn't matter how many. It's still 97% of 33%. A number of the scientists who refused to even take part explained why they refused, which you'll see after #3
3. There is likely a range of opinions
There were three apparently. 97% of the 33% said they agreed that humans were the primary driver of global warming. 3% of the 33% said they didn't think it was. And the 67% who didn't respond at all said they didn't because the questions were designed to lead to a preconceived conclusion, and that's not how to do science.
4. Unlike AGW, there was no foundation for consensus based on evidence because you were dealing with theory
Oh..my..god. AGW IS the theory the fake consensus was based on. Holy geez are you ever dumb. It's making my head hurt.