Global Warming Theory cannot be considered to be a science any longer

originally posted by: FriedBabelBroccoli
a reply to: amazing

That is for you to decide.

I am just more annoyed that climate change has become the Holy of Holies for a certain political group and questioning any aspect is tantamount to ex-communication or PR-execution.

I agree to the vast majority of the goals of the political argument in favour of climate change action, but certain aspects I see as purely political and not motivated by anything remotely approaching science. Then comes the blatant propaganda stats and hit pieces and people just eat it up without even realizing how much BS is in them.

-FBB

I can see the political side, but I also see that politics in the Climate change discussion swings both ways. Fossil fuel companies have lots of power in this debate.

a reply to: amazing

At this point EVERYONE has a very very heavy motive.

For climate scientists - this is it - the end. After years of raising fears of global cooling and a new ice age - then 30 years of raising fears of runaway global warming, If man made global warming is not proved, if the rate of temperature change continues to drop, providing evidence that the warming for the last 40 years is just natural variation - then the reputation of climate science is lost for ever or at least a very long long time.

For politicians - they will lose the money from carbon taxes. The public will be pissed off for a very long long time at all the money that was needlessly spent to date.

The ones that have the very least to lose is Big Oil. Big Oil has a product to sell and they can sell it at whatever price they want. If the use of fossil fuel decreases, its not an issue. They will simply raise the price on the oil they do sell to maintain profitability. Fossil fuels is not at any serious risk. It is used in to many manufacturing processes.

Tired of Control Freaks

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Kali74

The 97% consensus claim has been debunked several times already... Yet you, among some others keep using that number simply because you can't debate the science.

No the 97% consensus claim has not been debunked, repetition of a untruth does not make it then true. Debate what science? The scientists who disagree with human caused warming and have written papers on the subject are very few and they fail to explain a percentage of warming because they won't say human. Some even have accepted papers published in journals in their specific field but on human caused warming, they are wrong or are unnecessarily willing to be vague.

I don't need to debate the science. Science overwhelmingly states that Global Warming Theory is correct and that current global warming is largely due to human activity... so why would I need to debate it?

I have my limits and I have no problem stating when I have reached them, I've done it many times on this topic here on ATS. However I do have a decent grasp on climate science and can recognize garbage when I see it. Most refutations on this site are garbage.

As far as John Cook et al., it's not a scientific paper. It's a peer-reviewed and endorsed paper none the less. It's not a paper which requires the use of science to prove a statement. It's a review of abstracts of peer-reviewed papers that deal with climate with the question: How many of them endorse human activity as the cause of current warming? If not openly stated in the abstract what is the author's position on MMW? The answer is 97%.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

As the atmosphere has been "irradiated" as a constant through the use of Nuclear fuel creation, then when planes who disturb the air waves as a huge amount of traffic pass through the atmosphere....the increased disturbance would force the atmosphere to change.

Change of light and sound is caused by wave functions.

Many humans have complained about a skin rash aligned to the condition of chemtrails etc. and yet the evidence stated that it was not caused by fuel.

Therefore the only other reason that air planes would cause a form of chemical fall out, would belong to the nuclear irradiation.

As the nuclear fuel and atomic changes in fuel creation form "orbital" interaction, then the cloud formations that now have gained UFO ship images in them prove that the atmosphere has been changed by scientific interferences.

The argument is about who caused the circumstance of atmospheric changes and the outcome of those changes.

Science caused the change of the atmosphere and air planes simply add another disturbance to the atmosphere.

If you also cared to peruse some of the plane information....many pilots have witnessed UFO manifestations whilst they have been flying....and a plane was reviewed as being "hit" by an unidentified outcome.

As human life is natural, when you change the atmospheric condition, the outcome is change to cellular formation.

This too has been proven by victims of alien manifestations and the UFO situation....science.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

It appears to me that OBAMA, the President of the United States, is asking the public to participate in a harassment campaign against those scientist who do not belong to the global warming religion.

You mean those scientists that are funded by the oil industry....

a reply to: FriedBabelBroccoli

Does it also not start with you claiming science is lying or stupid? Does it not also end with you insulting those of us who dare to disagree with you?

To be clear, you think and state that we are all:

Liars
Propagandized
Fanatics
Lunatics
Agenda driven

Did I miss any?

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I posted a valid peer reviewed study for Kali74 to prove that the Medieval Warming Period was not a regional event as it affected the Pacific and Antartic Ocean. This is rather an important point. the Medieval Warming Period had higher temperatures then we have today and was a golden era for mankind. It points to the current global temperature being just an artifact of the earth's natural variability. Kali74 had nothing to say.

Funny, I remember quite a back and forth with you about it.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: FriedBabelBroccoli

Does it also not start with you claiming science is lying or stupid? Does it not also end with you insulting those of us who dare to disagree with you?

To be clear, you think and state that we are all:

Liars
Propagandized
Fanatics
Lunatics
Agenda driven

Did I miss any?

What's the comment giving science a personality, science has no personality
You make science an idol to be worshiped

Science is not lying or stupid, science has no personality.
Yes many scientists could be lying or stupid, scientists are not science, different beasts.

I am astounded you are trying to make science an organic entity with knowledge and feelings, it's weird, totally unnatural.

Now as for scientists, they are those things you called them and much more

Remember the atomic bomb, to kill millions, German scientists created mass weapons of destruction, allied as well,
Or are we to believe that all scientists are wearing white and wearing Angels wings playing harps

Yes we are all liars, you saying we are not?
Actually take out lunatics and that list is spot on.

a reply to: Kali74

I must have missed it. I won't say that you didn't respond, just that I missed it.

Obviously, the issue of whether or not the MWP was a global event is a central plank in the theory of anthropogenically sourced global warming.

If the MWP was a global event, and if the temperatures experienced during that time period were even higher than today, than it can be said that current "hottest temperatures" are simply an artifact of the natural variation of the global climate.

Further, since the MWP was the greatest age of properity and civilization for man, there is no need for man to take action to prevent further warming.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: purplemer

Are you sure - every scientist who does not prescribe to the notion that global warming is CAUSED by CO2 emissions is a scientist paid by Big Oil to hold that position?>

So I guess it would be equally probable that every scientist that supports the theory that global warming is CAUSED by CO2 emissions is paid by the government to hold that position? Also in order to get more and better study grants to pay their mortgages with?

Tired of Control Freaks

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: Kali74

I must have missed it. I won't say that you didn't respond, just that I missed it.

Obviously, the issue of whether or not the MWP was a global event is a central plank in the theory of anthropogenically sourced global warming.

If the MWP was a global event, and if the temperatures experienced during that time period were even higher than today, than it can be said that current "hottest temperatures" are simply an artifact of the natural variation of the global climate.

Further, since the MWP was the greatest age of properity and civilization for man, there is no need for man to take action to prevent further warming.

Tired of Control Freaks

One thing here... as someone who lives in Las Vegas, which is experiencing a warming trend over the past 20 years, it's becoming unbearable. It's already getting too hot for me and I'll be moving at some point in the future due to the excessive heat. It's already worse than that in some areas, like the middle east. And although some will enjoy the heat, there will be a mass migration from the middle east, sort of like we're having now but it will be hundreds of millions. I think that's going to be a problem for a lot of countries.

a reply to: amazing

Actually Amazing - it is cold that kills, not warm

www.usatoday.com...

But if it makes you feel any better, many scientists are starting to predict that the global temperature is entering a cooling phase.

Tired of Control Freaks

The ancient occultist review determines that CHRIST as the human spirit factored by PHI to be JESUS...died on the cross of WOOD.

WOOD....the condition involved in an atmospheric reaction...oxygen.

CHRIST STIGMATA....bleeding from the cell condition, also a modern day life inheritance (same condition).

What happened on Planet Earth to advise nuclear scientists that they never should have converted the crystal support of uranium? Especially when it was considered to be HOLY, as a DUST review of the ancient occultists?

Russia's forest flattened....nuclear experiments.

What did crops do when the crop matter was used for a combustion process...fuel creation?

The crops flattened and gained a PHI sound pattern laid in it.

What did the elitist control then do?........thought about how they could emulate the condition to hide the information from public scrutiny, the use of ridicule and public disinformation.

What has the stone body of Earth got inlaid into its body? The same form of patterns of PHI sounds.

Is it too difficult for the occult Scientists to consider themselves incorrect about the spiritual life/cellular holiness of living on Earth?

What does radiation incineration cause? Combustion and the form of coal via organic life loss.

Does the Earth's atmosphere have an organic presence in it? Yes, the microbial population as the base evolution of all species on Earth.

Is it any wonder that we are getting attacked by evil spirit manifestations?

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

The argument over the change of climate considers 2 conditions....heat and cold effects, and both are present as the same review.

The atmosphere was once natural and had a condition involving the ice poles....and the natural cooling flows of air.

Science changed AIR...another ancient occult practice that involved conversions AIR/FIRE/WATER/WOOD.

The ancients also knew that changing AIR flow was an evil act.

Ice demonstrates it is melting, and cold air is obviously being released into irradiated heated atmospheric streams as a cause and effect outcome.

Therefore the natural flow that allowed other continents its own natural seasons, demonstrate change...because the natural cold flow has changed its origin condition. The coldness gained elsewhere is the inherited condition, as heated conditions are also inherited at the same time.

Therefore both arguments are correct, and seasonal life on Earth is changing by its own evidence.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: FriedBabelBroccoli

Does it also not start with you claiming science is lying or stupid? Does it not also end with you insulting those of us who dare to disagree with you?

To be clear, you think and state that we are all:

Liars
Propagandized
Fanatics
Lunatics
Agenda driven

Did I miss any?

I never said science was lying.

It should have been clear when I said the psychologist, Mr. Cook, was being disingenuous. The behaviour of his supporters has been fanatical and clearly agenda driven. But yes, I do think several of you have so bought in to propaganda that you can not even perceive how dramatically it affects your interpretation of data points.

-FBB

//edit

Yes the 97% percent has been thoroughly debunked. (0.54)(0.65)+(.97)(.33) =/= .97 That is simple math based on his data collection. When 35% of the climate scientists refuse to endorse the the consensus model it does not mean that 97% of climate scientists agree to the IPCC model.

That is simple to understand and yet . . . .
//edit

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: amazing

Actually Amazing - it is cold that kills, not warm

www.usatoday.com...

But if it makes you feel any better, many scientists are starting to predict that the global temperature is entering a cooling phase.

Tired of Control Freaks

I understand that cold can kill but some models predict severe warming and drought in middle eastern regions. The heat index hit Iran at 164 this past year. That's pretty much unbearable. If that becomes the norm there will be migration. Only people that have never endured that kind of heat say things like cold kills and heat is good for the earth. Try living in Vegas next summer...that will cure you of ever saying those kinds of things again.

a reply to: amazing

Try living in Ontario Canada with winter chill values of -50 degrees celsius, where you can lose your fingers to frost bite in less than 5 minutes.

Tired of Control Freaks

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
Obviously, the issue of whether or not the MWP was a global event is a central plank in the theory of anthropogenically sourced global warming.

If the MWP was a global event, and if the temperatures experienced during that time period were even higher than today, than it can be said that current "hottest temperatures" are simply an artifact of the natural variation of the global climate.

Further, since the MWP was the greatest age of properity and civilization for man, there is no need for man to take action to prevent further warming.

Why's that?

The Medieval Warm Period was, as best we can tell, cooler than it's been in the last few decades. Even if it were global, it was cooler than today.

Why do people think it was warmer? I suppose because the MWP was warmer than the 1860s, which a lot of ice reconstructions call 'present day.'

originally posted by: amazing
I understand that cold can kill but some models predict severe warming and drought in middle eastern regions. The heat index hit Iran at 164 this past year. That's pretty much unbearable. If that becomes the norm there will be migration. Only people that have never endured that kind of heat say things like cold kills and heat is good for the earth. Try living in Vegas next summer...that will cure you of ever saying those kinds of things again.

Heatwaves tend to be the most deadly singular short weather event. Droughts and floods kill more on average, annually.

Something like 70,000 died in Europe in 2003 and 55,000 died in Russia in 2010 from the heatwaves.