Climate Change -- conspiracy theory or is it time we all drive a Prius?

Quote: SOOPOO

...Cuomo in 2020.

You seriously need to stop. I've never once went to the Dr and had them say anything other than "Your BP is perfect!" (just said it again last week), and you're about to ruin it -_-

Blue folk, don't let me down. Pick a winner in '20, not this insufferable assclown.

How did the hysterical Left miss this?

"Last year there were at least 60 peer-reviewed papers published in scientific journals demonstrating that Today’s Warming Isn’t Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable.'

This article is very long and very detailed
and nobody here will read it. GW is a
myth, deal with it.

http://notrickszone.com/2017/05/29/80-graphs-from-58-new-2017-papers-invalidate-claims-of-unprecedented-global-scale-modern-warming/#sthash.ktF0tSb7.cyqeMNk5.dpuf

Evenbob you really need to have someone show you how to use the internet. How can you seriously use such a biased site for your information. I haven't read what you posted but just a cursory glance at the website and its purpose would give me serious pause. You do this a lot and unfortunately I think it is because you have a hard time finding legitimate sources that support you.

Quote: Evenbob

http://notrickszone.com/2017/05/29/80-graphs-from-58-new-2017-papers-invalidate-claims-of-unprecedented-global-scale-modern-warming/#sthash.ktF0tSb7.cyqeMNk5.dpuf

Notrickszone??????????????
Yea, this is the go to news site on the internet. Sarcasm
Some clown questions GW and EB thinks its proof
ROTFL
Fake news site

Quote: FrGamble

I haven't read what you posted but just a cursory glance

LOL! You are so full of yourself, it's very
entertaining. You know what you know
and it's all you'll ever know..

Quote: Evenbob

LOL! You are so full of yourself, it's very
entertaining.

Entertaining conservatives with no critical thinking skills is not news
ROTFL

Quote: Evenbob

How did the hysterical Left miss this?

"Last year there were at least 60 peer-reviewed papers published in scientific journals demonstrating that Today’s Warming Isn’t Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable.'

This article is very long and very detailed
and nobody here will read it. GW is a
myth, deal with it.

http://notrickszone.com/2017/05/29/80-graphs-from-58-new-2017-papers-invalidate-claims-of-unprecedented-global-scale-modern-warming/#sthash.ktF0tSb7.cyqeMNk5.dpuf

So I suppose you followed the links and read each peer reviewed paper? I don't blame you, neither did I. However I did read one of the papers. "North Pacific 20th century decadal-scale variability is unique for the past 342 years."- Williams et al., 2017. The conclusion was interesting.

Quote:

Based on the reconstruction of SST, decadal variability is absent in the first half of the 20th century in the northern North Pacific, only emerging post 1950. Considering the significant influence of decadal-scale variability on global climate, and efforts to understand how this decadal-scale variability may continue evolving as anthropogenic changes to climate occur, it is important to recognize that the last half of the 20th century exhibits climatic conditions not evident in the period prior to an anthropogenic influence. Thus, studies based on post-1950 instrumental records (e.g., for climate model validation and to determine mechanisms driving climate variability and related teleconnections to distant locations) may not be demonstrably relevant to understanding long-term regional climate conditions.

This author clearly believes his data is consistent with anthropogenic global warming. It is clear that the notrickzone article is just a collection of graphs from journal articles that kinda look like they don't show a warming trend without regard to what the author is really trying to say. The purpose of sites like this is to perpetuate the illusion that there is significant disagreement in the climate science community about AGW.

Now there are probably a few papers in this long list that are actually peer reviewed articles that attempt to refute AGW, but peer review is just the first qualifying step for science research. The true test of a science paper is if scientists in the field read it and find it useful enough to build on it with their own research. It doesn't matter what EB or I think of any of these papers. EB referenced a paper a few posts back by Hermann Harde that is peer reviewed and very contrarian. It could be that Hermann Harde is the next Einstein or Darwin and has shown the world that the overwhelming body of climate research is just dead wrong, but the safe bet is that Hermann is wrong.

Quote: terapined

Entertaining conservatives with no critical thinking skills is not news

Seems to me the people with no critical thinking skills are the people who say they just listen to the scientists because the scientists know better.

Quote: JimRockford

It could be that Hermann Harde is the next Einstein or Darwin

Bottom line is, trump just sucked the
life out of the GW fraud movement
by withdrawing our 2 trillion dollar
commitment to it. Without cash the
fraud will eventually dwindle and go
away, as all frauds for money do.

Quote: AZDuffman

Seems to me the people with no critical thinking skills are the people who say they just listen to the scientists because the scientists know better.

You didn't show any critical thinking skills pretending only one side would be about making money.