Scientists in cover-up of ‘damaging’ climate view

[petros]

They undeniably proved AGW in the 1800s? That too is f-cking amazing.

Beyond the CO2 input formulation used as the flagship to prove anthro sourced CO2 but hasn't what do you have?

 

[EagleSmack]

Global Warming fraud on the other hand runs on hundred of millions of dollars constantly pumped in by the oil and tobacco corporations.

Of course it is those hundreds of millions that the chicken littles want and actually feel entitled to.


Greed and theft drives the Cult of Global Warming and nothing more.

 

[petros]

You forgot emotionally and mentally crippling fear.

 

[Tonington]

Beyond the CO2 input formulation used as the flagship to prove anthro sourced CO2 but hasn't what do you have?

You won't know until you read. I'm not here to provide you with guided reading. You asked, I gave you an answer. If you won't read it, then it's not really a discussion I'm interested in having.

 

[EagleSmack]

You forgot emotionally and mentally crippling fear.

CK is the most afraid and spastic alarmist I've seen in awhile.

 

[Tonington]

I don't need to read them as the truther models, in principle, have no capacity to explain the past or predict the future.

See, that's your problem right there. You think it's all models despite words explicitly stating something else. The answer to Derpy included words like observations and satellite measurements and quantify. I refer specifically to observations, and somehow you read that and arrive at models.

If it's not denial on your part, then what is it?

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

CK is the most afraid and spastic alarmist I've seen in awhile.

I guess that's true if you find the facts alarming, how about disputing them with facts of your own instead of this imbecilic attempt at a flame war.

Show me where big tobacco and the oil sector aren't funding Global Warming denial fraud.

Also provide peer reviewed evidence that counters the very extensive science supporting Global Warming.

Otherwise all you're communicating is an extensive contempt for the rights of others.

 

[captain morgan]

See, that's your problem right there. You think it's all models despite words explicitly stating something else. The answer to Derpy included words like observations and satellite measurements and quantify. I refer specifically to observations, and somehow you read that and arrive at models.

If it's not denial on your part, then what is it?

In order for the truther model to work, the reader must buy into the AGW cult in addition to dismissing a variety of inputs (like solar for example)... Furthermore, the model also requires that you dismiss all of the damning evidence as it pertains to the unethical, immoral 'scientific' fix that was and is being identified on an ongoing basis.

Petros has consistently pointed-out the obvious and glaring flaws.. The soda pop reference was particularly interesting.

That said, no thanks, I am not interested in drinking the lethal dose of kool-aid just for sh*ts and giggles

 

[petros]

You won't know until you read. I'm not here to provide you with guided reading. You asked, I gave you an answer. If you won't read it, then it's not really a discussion I'm interested in having.

What part of "In your own words" baffled you?

So let's converse as I asked not cut and paste somebody else's words.

Which undeniable fact do you base your ardent belief upon?

Lay it out.

 

[EagleSmack]

I guess that's true if you find the facts alarming, how about disputing them with facts of your own instead of this imbecilic attempt at a flame war.

Show me where big tobacco and the oil sector aren't funding Global Warming denial fraud.

Also provide peer reviewed evidence that counters the very extensive science supporting Global Warming.

Otherwise all you're communicating is an extensive contempt for the rights of others.

Its a SCAM.. and you're a SUCKER.


Now excuse me. Me and my Big Azz SUV are heading into the city. I suppose I could take the train but I'd rather drive my 8 cylinder and laugh.

 

[captain morgan]

Its a SCAM.. and you're a SUCKER.


Now excuse me. Me and my Big Azz SUV are heading into the city. I suppose I could take the train but I'd rather drive my 8 cylinder and laugh.

Make sure you start it with the A/C on full.... Myself, I insist on being able to get into a nice, climate controlled vehicle and not a hot and stuffy one.

Give 'er about 10 minutes - have a snack inside the house - and she ought to be just right by then

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

Its a SCAM.. and you're a SUCKER.


Now excuse me. Me and my Big Azz SUV are heading into the city. I suppose I could take the train but I'd rather drive my 8 cylinder and laugh.

That's not evidence, it's not even a real opinion.

And there is no excuse for this kind of behaviour in an adult, which at this pointn whether you actually are one becomes completely debatable.

Make sure you start it with the A/C on full.... Myself, I insist on being able to get into a nice, climate controlled vehicle and not a hot and stuffy one.

Give 'er about 10 minutes - have a snack inside the house - and she ought to be just right by then

That's a pretty common pattern with the Global Warming deniers here, once the discussion reaches a certain point it's pulled completely off track. It illustrates very well just how the denial fraud actually works in the absence of any supporting evidence.

 

[Tonington]

What part of "In your own words" baffled you?

The only part that isn't my own words is the references. Are you telling me that everything you've said on this subject comes from your own original thoughts? Bull. You asked what I go on, so I gave my answer and included where my answer comes from. You know, what the people studying this have found. There are other people on this forum reading besides just yourself, and if they want to decide for themselves, well I gave them the resources to do just that.

Petros has consistently pointed-out the obvious and glaring flaws.. The soda pop reference was particularly interesting.

And I responded with the physics that show why it's more than temperature alone that matters. I guess you must have missed that. It went a little something like this:

I think you have me confused with someone else. I'm well versed on gas solubility. You tried pawning off some weak sauce a while back, but you're apparently unaware that the solubility of gases is reliant on more than just temperature. It's also reliant on things like the partial pressure of the gases above the solvent, and the concentration of dissolved ions in the solution.

You have to know this if you work with fish...yes the solubility goes down when the temp goes up, the solubility goes down when the water is 'saltier', the solubility goes up when the partial pressure of gases increases.

These are all principles you have to know if you are like me and work with aquatic animals that require...dissolved gases to breathe, and if like me you also need to understand how to strip carbon dioxide from the water. Henry's Law, the solubility of a gas in water is proportional to the partial pressure of gas in the air. I need to put oxygen in and take carbon dioxide out. Solubility and temperature are not proportional, but there are tables out there that will fit these purposes.

Now here is some simple math even for you to understand. Carbon dioxide concentration as measured by Keeling in 1958 was about 315. Today it's 401. That's a percent increase of 27.3%. Now what has been the percent change in the temperature? Over the same period, the ocean has increased by about 0.5°C from 17°C. The solubility of carbon dioxide in 10°C water at 1 bar is 1.3 cm^3/g of water. Double the temperature and keep the pressure the same, and the solubility has decreased to 0.88 cm^3/g of water. So to get a roughly similar 32.3% decrease in solubility you need 10°C of temperature change , and we're at far less than that. Two orders of magnitude higher than the 0.5°C we've experienced.

Yeah, I'm not worried at all about what you think of my credibility.

 

[captain morgan]

That's a pretty common pattern with the Global Warming deniers here, once the discussion reaches a certain point it's pulled completely off track. It illustrates very well just how the denial fraud actually works in the absence of any supporting evidence.

Spare me the sad country song pal.

All you have offered are platitudes and rhetoric... I laughed my azz off when you went on how climate change was of intense interest to millions of Canadians... What a load - no one, other than the handful of fanatics and clowns like Suzuki give a crap about it, and Suzuki only cares because he gets millions of dollars from the gullible.

Get over yourself already

Yeah, I'm not worried at all about what you think of my credibility.

I haven't wasted as much as a nanosecond thinking about your cred

 

[Colpy]

I Show me where big tobacco and the oil sector aren't funding Global Warming denial fraud.

Ahh....excuse me, but you made the accusation, the proof of it is therefore your responsibility.

 

[petros]

The only part that isn't my own words is the references. Are you telling me that everything you've said on this subject comes from your own original thoughts? Bull. You asked what I go on, so I gave my answer and included where my answer comes from. You know, what the people studying this have found. There are other people on this forum reading besides just yourself, and if they want to decide for themselves, well I gave them the resources to do just that.

I know the mechanics of what is supposed to be happening but they lack undeniable proof of AGW happening.

Not a single model works so what else do you have?

A 97% consensus amongst people who have authored papers drawing a AGW conclusion?

If 100 beer drinkers were asked if they liked beer would there be an overwhelming consensus that beer is good amongst beer drinkers?

Yes or no and what does it prove ?

 

[Locutus]

follow the money

 

[darkbeaver]

14MAY 2014 WeatherAction News No 18
NASA GIVES ITS MOST DELUDED SCARE STORY EVER - Piers Corbyn points out there is no basis whatsoever to believe the (200 year hence) West Antarctic Ice sheet sea-level rise scare story merits serious concern and says it is produced and circulated by the usual suspects to fulfill a political agenda.

11 MAY 2014 WeatherAction News No 17
Public Info NEWS page WORLD RTQ MAY Forecast: (1) UN IPSD - Intergovernmental Panel of Science Denial. (2) Tornado Swarms and the Mini Ice Age. To get Full RTQ or other forecasts for this unusually ACTIVE MAY go to WeatherAction Membership

7 MAY 2014 WeatherAction News No16
ITALY FLOODS 4May CONFIRM WeatherAction EuroMaps Regions Forecast Detail Comments from Piers For flood VIDEO

6 MAY 2014 WeatherAction News No 15
Superb confirmation of R5 2-4 May (period defined 14 April) - 1. RTQ forecast, geomagnetic and Earthquake reports. details Comments from Piers For Italy floods see same link and WANews14No16.pdf

26 April 2014 WeatherAction News No 14
Thunderstorms in R4 period 24-25Apr UK SUPERBLY confirm WeatherAction 40day ahead detailed Forecasts. Piers says "IT'S TIME NOW TO SUBSCRIBE TO WeatherAction SPRINGTIME HOPE Special, limited offers"

21 April 2014 WeatherAction News No 13
Easter both sides Atlantic confirm WeatherAction. Extreme Solar Flares, CME (Coronal Mass ejection), thunder, hail, Auroras, Quakes hit in top Red R5 and QV5 period Easter weekend April 19-20 +/-1d.

WeatherAction is involved in the Global Warming /Climate Change debate where we point out that the world is now cooling not warming and there is no observational evidence in the thousands and millions of years of data that changes in CO2 have any effect on weather or climate. There are no scientists in the world who can produce such observational data. There is only effect the other way, namely that ocean temperatures control average CO2 levels.
Thank you, Piers Corbyn, MSc (astrophysics), ARCS, FRAS, FRMetS
Director WeatherAction

 

[petros]

follow the money

Or follow the papers. Being published is necessity for an associate to get tenure even if it is a psychologist drifting a global warming paper.

Being published is more important to researchers than anything else.

It a acedemic brownie badge.

 

[Tonington]

I haven't wasted as much as a nanosecond thinking about your cred

lol, that wasn't for you, that was in reply to the soda pop science fail from Derpy.

I know the mechanics of what is supposed to be happening but they lack undeniable proof of AGW happening.

No you don't, you don't even understand gas solubility laws.