Nick Anderson for September 29, 2013

“Bubble boy” still not exposed to germs, or the germ of a thoought?

Neither one of you read for yourselves. Radish, you should just change your name to parrot. Everything you’ve written is denied by the ‘scientists’ you have your faith in.

In the real world, Chakra Al Gore is enjoying his new multi-million $$ beach house..

He doesn’t seem to be too concerned about the sea rising.

perfect response Jeff!Thanks!

This is not about “tolerance” of other views. It’s about facts. Global warming is a fact. Human contribution is a fact. What the science actually says is that it is 95% certain — which is generally accepted by the scientific community — that there is significant global warming primarily caused by human beings. (The acceptance of global warming itself is higher still.)There is no need to be “tolerant” of people who reject the facts. It’s like being tolerant of the Flat Earth Society.

Ah, yes, the idiot graph again. That percentage of alcohol in your blood would significantly change YOUR behavior and ability to drive. That percentage of arsenic in your system would kill you. Quit posting this! It doesn’t mean anything. Or I can restate it for you: The percentage of CO2 is small, but its impact is so large that a meaningful increase will have major effects on the climate.And that is what has happened.

onguard asks “Are there any Dem Libs posting here that are not Doctors or Scientists?” Are there any conservatives posting here who are doctors or scientists?

The IPCC, the leading advocate of Gorebal Warming has been wrong on virtually every prediction it has made. But, what else should one expect from the UN, that gentleman’s debating society that has produced nothing of real value in its entire history.

Then there’s the the cult leader himself, Al Gore. He produced a book of drivel and a mediocre move that wanted us to believe that ancedote and story telling equal scientific proof.

Three alternatives to Gorebal Warming:

Changing albedo of the EarthIncreased water vapor in the atmosphere in large part due to contrails.Decreased particulates in the atmosphere due to a global reduction in air pollution.

All three can be demonstarted to have far greater effect on climate than a miniscule change in CO2 content in the atmosphere.

HOUSE #1 is outside of Nashville , Tennessee ; it is the abode of the “environmentalist” Al Gore;HOUSE #2 is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas ; it is the residence the of the President of the United States , George W. Bush.An “inconvenient truth.”

GREAT STUFF!

On "belief/faith without accurate facts, versus science based on fact: IF I go goose hunting, the theory and data reveal that if I use 00 buckshot and shoot at a goose, there is a probability, based on skill levels, that I may, or will actually shoot a goose, but still might miss. If I take that same shotgun with 00 buckshot, stick it in my mouth, and pull the trigger, it WILL basically blow my head off.

Deniers believe misrepresented “facts”, or outright lies, to say climate change isn’t happening, or isn’t human caused. Even the latest report does give the “scientific” benefit of the doubt there’s a whole 5% chance humans aren’t the ENTIRE cause of global warming, but still doesn’t absolve them of the majority of “blame”. This “deniers” grab on to to claim that 5% margin of error is the only “truth”.

Ernest Hemingway DID prove the facts of shotgun “science”. Yes, that WAS a “theory”, and DID HAVE “proofs”, which is where in science, hypothesis becomes either theory, or “rule”.

And yes, I guess three degrees and over 30 years of experience in the field working on “science” research would classify me as a “scientist” of sorts. Having over time read books, research papers, and other documents from other fields, like engineering, as well as talking to people with other expertise over 5 or so decades, equivalent to several additional degree programs in other fields, might give credence to thoughts and convictions on those other “subjects”.

Of course, those who listen to Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, or other “pundits” obviously have a higher degree of education with regard to “facts”. Right….

…and “climate change” believers ? Well at least they believe in something that is GUARANTEED to happen…

Well, I’m not a scientist, so I don’t post my opinions about climate change. But I do read the links that other people post, and I find that those posted by the liberal/science crowd are much more detailed and comprehensive than the links provided by the deniers, which often are just newspaper articles. As for attacks on Al Gore, those are simply irrelevant and silly. Those who post them are motivated by personal animosity rather than an interest in answering the real questions.

Actually, the IPCC has been consistently too CONSERVATIVE in their estimates. See this data and a plethora of graphs care of Skeptical Science:http://skepticalscience.com/ipcc-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

Your chart is meaningless in the context of ahab’s statement. Ahab was referring to a study that extended back “only” 400,000 years. On your chart, that is a tiny sliver on the right edge. The measurements on your chart are far to broad in terms of time scale to compare, not to mention that on a graph of that scale, events like tectonic shifts & major volcanic eruptions have more to do with the temperature changes than CO2. I’d like to see the source of your chart, though. It looks like an interesting site.

Scientists do chastise you folks for a reason. Some of you cannot bother to look up facts or do basic calculations.Thanks, I read varney’s post and had to LOL.The warmer ocean temperature actually means more evaporation, which explains why we are having more & more severe hurricanes.

Scientists working on a landmark U.N. report on climate change are struggling to explain why global warming appears to have slowed down in the past 15 years even though greenhouse gas emissions keep rising.Does anyone else think it’s odd that conservatives are all to eager to say this slowdown in rate of growth means global warming has stopped, but see the same kind of trend very differently when we’re talking about the deficit?

We aren’t having more and more severe hurricaneshttp://www.atmosedu.com/ENVS109/articles/Emanuel05-hurricanes.pdfhttp://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7178/full/nature06422.html

Who says GW has stopped?You didn’t say that? Ah, right you only cut & pasted it.Another interesting parallel. Conservatives are.. we’ll just say very open to the idea that GW is caused by factors besides humans, but not open to the idea that the deficit/recession was caused by factors other than Obama.Come back when you can tell me how much of the deficit was caused by spending going up & how much was caused by extremely low tax revenues. Then you can tell me why you blame the financial crisis on Fannie, Freddie & Obama, despite the fact that 83% of subprime mortgages were issued by private banks.

The latest IPCC — which, you should recall, is the consensus of scientists from all over the world AND has been consistently conservative in its estimates — says 95% certain.http://www.voanews.com/content/un-panel-warming-extremely-likely-manmade/1758183.html

scoffed with “Are there any doctors or scientists here that have a strong enough ego that they don’t feel compelled to continually let us know that they are doctors and scientists?”

Do you know why they have to “come out”? Because of posters here who continually post erroneous information. They will need to refute it of course, but in order to refute, they would have to have credibility-weight behind their posts. It could be anyone claiming to be scientists. How do they back up what they post and prove they are who they say they are?The quality of their posts then back up their credentials.It isn’t bragging rights. Only those who lack scientific credentials would see it as bragging rights. I sense some envy.

By the way, I now know several posters on this forum and they are who they say they are. But I realise you don’t know me so I could be just saying that. ;-)Then rely on the quality of their posts. If you’re unable to judge the quality, should you be involved in debating in what is beyond your realm?You seem quite adamant they’re wrong but all you can come up with are copy/pastes. Come up with something original or stay out of the kitchen.

Ever watch the American sitcom, Big Bang Theory? I identify with the engineer dude (sort of, developing a space toilet is out of my league!), as I’m sure another poster here, Ruff, will. We usually apply science developed by scientists, emphasis on “usually”. Scientists often come up with the plan, engineers make them work.(again, not mutually exclusive)

It seems others here don’t understand the role of scientists who delve into research like yourself, DrC, Motive, Lynne B. Baslim et al and appear to fear what they don’t understand. Hence the scoffing.

There’s a ball of fire in the sky…‘keeps a-shinin’ on you and I, you and I.