Jump to content

Am I still allowed to question climate change?

Recommended Posts

Are we?

 

.

 

We are getting somewhere in that you stated we simply don’t know, it wasn’t long ago that the powers that be said that we were all to blame for the decline of those little furry polar bears.:love:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We are getting somewhere in that you stated we simply don’t know, it wasn’t long ago that the powers that be said that we were all to blame for the decline of those little furry polar bears.:love:

 

Essentially we are being told that man made climate change is taking place, but just because temperatures haven't risen doesn't mean that it's not taking place or will not manifest itself in the future.

Many here including yourself claim to know what's happening, and are taking a smug "I told you so" attitude, but the reality is you could still be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AGW is not science, it's politics.
"Science" in this case being "blog science", presumably. Since there's nothing in the real, peer-reviewed literature to support that statement you just made.

 

PS where are all the supporters of AGW on this forum? They seem to be rather quiet at the moment...
At the moment, I personally am doing "science". Can't speak for the rest, but I'm guessing like me they're just tired of repeating the same old basic physics and statistics lessons to the same old idiots over and over again.

 

You guys are an irrelevence. Who am I to spoil your little fun?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.

Many here including yourself claim to know what's happening, and are taking a smug "I told you so" attitude, but the reality is you could still be wrong.

 

I have never made any smug statement and I don’t claim to know what is going on, I do object to being accused for the downfall of the planet for putting my rubbish in the wrong bin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Science" in this case being "blog science", presumably. Since there's nothing in the real, peer-reviewed literature to support that statement you just made.[/Quote]

 

About that...

 

The other paper by MM is just garbage – as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well – frequently as I see it. I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. K and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is ! [/QUote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Global warming "Nutters" make my blood boil.

 

 

Global Warming theory has been put about becaue we cant keep using the worlds oils & Gases, they've brought this in to ensure we use alternative fuels and stop the reliance with RUSSIA & ASIA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No Evidence for Global Warming !

 

You don’t say:- :o:o

 

Apologies greatly received from all those that have shot me down on this subject in the past.:roll:

 

 

I was saying that 2 years ago, all we have to do now is convert the gullible.

 

No evidence of being smug!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Global warming "Nutters" make my blood boil.

 

Same here. Climate change due to co2 levels is more or less proved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Same here. Climate change due to co2 levels is more or less proved.

 

No, as nothing is ever proven in science, nor does it belong in the realm of science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
About that...
About what? Seeing as they didn't have the power of god over what went in or was left out of the IPCC report, it's clearly an argument that they're going to make rather than an action they're going to take. It's not for them to "redefine" anything, but peer-review is the first BS filter, not the only one. Stuff slips through, and tends to be weeded out by other means.

 

Absolutely no underhand practice has been exposed here. All that has been shown is that a few scientists at ONE institution are - shock, horror - human, and get a little narked off at people deliberately trying to muddy the waters and obfuscate the science.

 

This will die down like the last "final nail in the coffin of AGW", and the one before that, and the one before that. Any wonder why all but a small number of dedicated people have ceased to bother debunking this stuff? I used to visit Anthony Watts site, for example, because I like giving people a chance, but there is only so much spectacular scientific illiteracy you can take before you give up.

 

Meanwhile, we are still in the middle of a warming trend, we are still in the hottest decade on record and carbon dioxide is still well established as the cause. If the context-free publishing of illegally hacked emails from a SINGLE institution is the best evidence against this, then it's pretty damn robust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, as nothing is ever proven in science, nor does it belong in the realm of science.

 

True but the evidence for CO2 driven climate change is overwhelming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.