Thread: Any doubts about Climate Change?

Originally Posted by RPETER65

weather is absolutely the product of climate

Well no shit that is why we are seeing more and more extreme weather events.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

the polar vortex happens every winter no matter the climate.

You just proved yourself to be an utter moron. You clearly do not even have a clue as to what the polar vortex even is. Climate change has disrupted the polar vortex. It has everything to do with climate.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I realize you hate Christians and as I am one you have a hatred for me but at least make sensible posts.

I hate Christians? News to me. All my posts are sensible that's why I am always correcting and contradicting you.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by RPETER65

weather is absolutely the product of climate

Well no shit that is why we are seeing more and more extreme weather events.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

the polar vortex happens every winter no matter the climate.

You just proved yourself to be an utter moron. You clearly do not even have a clue as to what the polar vortex even is. Climate change has disrupted the polar vortex. It has everything to do with climate.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I realize you hate Christians and as I am one you have a hatred for me but at least make sensible posts.

I hate Christians? News to me. All my posts are sensible that's why I am always correcting and contradicting you.

That is not what you said in your reply to my post about weather being a product of climate, in your reply you said yes and no, and then for some unknown reason called me a moron, then brought up the polar vortex which I had not even mentioned.

As far as the polar vortex, you are quite wrong, I am very well of what the polar vortex is, and when did I dispute the polar vortex has changed.

These are the things that tell me your idiotic replies to my post are usually of base, I say nothing to in contradiction to climate change or the changes in the polar vortex and you blather on about me being a moron. I have to say it is you being moronic as you have no sense as to what I am posting. It is this kind of thinking that I talk about when I say a head full of facts but no intelegence to put it all together.

Nothing personal that's just the way I see it.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

You seem to be the idiot, by responding to my post you absolutely said you think what you posted to be things to run away from, I imagined nothing, I asked what we would be running away from and you responded, think about it if you posses that ability.

You really should go back and try and finish High School.

I didn't respond to your post. I responded to the subsequent question: "what is the worst that can happen by the temperature of the earth going up a few degrees?"

Do you understand how threads work?

Seeing as the original question from me was what should we run from, then snubbles chimed in with some of his usual dribble, and you commented you most certainly was responding to my original post. But go ahead and lie your way out, you certainly are good at it, problem is your only fooling yourself.

I suggest you refer to your earlier post where you asked "what is the worst that can happen by the temperature of the earth going up a few degrees.".

I also suggest you get checked out for Alzheimers.

That post was in reference to the post about things to run run away from, do try to keep up.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

That is not what you said in your reply to my post about weather being a product of climate, in your reply you said yes and no, and then for some unknown reason called me a moron, then brought up the polar vortex which I had not even mentioned.

I was responding to a comment you made about the recent cold snap in Asia and the NE US. The polar vortex is directly to blame that is why I mentioned it you nitwit. Due to the warm air in the arctic regions the vortex has become destabilized and is wobbling. Did you even look at the graphic I posted?

A local weatherman here in Seattle that you may be familiar with (Jeff Renner) described the phenomenon very simply. Think of the polar vortex as a bowl placed on top of a globe. Before climate change that bowl never moved however after the warming of the arctic that bowl wobbles because it has become unstable. So when the bowl wobbles the areas it hits will have unusual weather. Exactly like what is happening in Asia right now.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

These are the things that tell me your idiotic replies to my post are usually of base, I say nothing to in contradiction to climate change or the changes in the polar vortex and you blather on about me being a moron.

If you are going to call someone a moron then you better at least use proper grammar and spelling otherwise you just look like the moron. But that would not be the first time eh petey?

Originally Posted by RPETER65

That post was in reference to the post about things to run run away from, do try to keep up.

I'm going to try and explain it to you one more time.

If you are commenting on a post that contains nested quotes, it is implied (at least for people who aren't fucking morons) that you are responding to the most recent.

If you wish to respond to something earlier in the conversation, you edit out the parts that aren't relevant.

Now I want you to go and look at post #3309.

Look at the line above my response.

And who knows, maybe a little light bulb will go on in that malfunctioning, tiny little brain of yours.

If not, maybe ECT would help.

Jaysus you are as thick as shit sometimes.

Maybe you should try some of that shit they sell on Fox News, made from Jellyfish bollocks or something, they reckon it helps old people stop forgetting things.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

That post was in reference to the post about things to run run away from, do try to keep up.

I'm going to try and explain it to you one more time.

If you are commenting on a post that contains nested quotes, it is implied (at least for people who aren't fucking morons) that you are responding to the most recent.

If you wish to respond to something earlier in the conversation, you edit out the parts that aren't relevant.

Now I want you to go and look at post #3309.

Look at the line above my response.

And who knows, maybe a little light bulb will go on in that malfunctioning, tiny little brain of yours.

If not, maybe ECT would help.

Jaysus you are as thick as shit sometimes.

Maybe you should try some of that shit they sell on Fox News, made from Jellyfish bollocks or something, they reckon it helps old people stop forgetting things.

You only post this because of your lack of ability to follow the link, actually it should be quite evident to you as I know you live and breath every word of these posts. Just another example of your lack of reasoning ability.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Just another example of your lack of reasoning ability.

And on that bombshell...

RPETER65 This message is hidden because RPETER65 is on your ignore list.

Originally Posted by Neo

And on that bombshell...

RPETER65 This message is hidden because RPETER65 is on your ignore list.

Does this mean you're leaving the pack?

Good on ya, the whole pack dog mentality isn't very intelligent.
Think for yourself.

Here we attempt to address that question using a semi-empirical approach that combines the latest (CMIP53) climate model simulations with observations of global and hemispheric mean temperature. We find that individual record years and the observed runs of record-setting temperatures were extremely unlikely to have occurred in the absence of human-caused climate change, though not nearly as unlikely as press reports have suggested. These same record temperatures were, by contrast, quite likely to have occurred in the presence of anthropogenic climate forcing.

The Likelihood of Recent Record Warmth : Scientific Reports

Extremely unlikely - less then 5%

Quite likely - over 90%

Figure 3: NH (left) and Global (right) mean estimated natural variability component (blue) along with five different Monte Carlo ARMA surrogates (gray) using CMIP5 all-forcing experiments.

......

Measuring global temperatures: Satellites or thermometers?


Measuring global temperatures: Satellites or thermometers?


The official global temperature numbers are in, and NOAA and NASA have decided that 2015 was the warmest year on record. Based mostly upon surface thermometers, the official pronouncement ignores the other two primary ways of measuring global air temperatures, satellites and radiosondes (weather balloons).
The fact that those ignored temperature datasets suggest little or no warming for about 18 years now, it is worth outlining the primary differences between these three measurement systems.


-

I do believe “global warming” has occurred, but (1) it is weaker than expected, based upon independent satellite and weather balloon measurements; (2) it has been overestimated with poorly adjusted surface-based thermometers; (3) it has a substantial natural component; and (4) it is likely to be more beneficial to life on Earth than harmful.

Umbuku, Landreth and others: 'Here's some peer-reviewed research / data from the overwhelming majority of scientists that believe in climate change'


Blue and others: 'Here's an 'article' that I Googled to confirm my confirmation bias, published by a denial website that doesn't disclose its funding, and written by a guy who also believes in intelligent design'


Anyone with the ability to apply reason and logic: 'Science FTW!'

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

and written by a guy who also believes in intelligent design

Commented on by someone who has no clue about intelligent design.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

someone who has no clue about intelligent design

I know that it's not a science.

It's pseudo-science. At best.

It's creationism playing dress up and pretending to be science.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by RPETER65

someone who has no clue about intelligent design

I know that it's not a science.

It's pseudo-science. At best.

It's creationism playing dress up and pretending to be science.

Call it what it is: Religious mumbo jumbo.

Originally Posted by blue

The fact that those ignored temperature datasets

Thorough, not thoroughly fabricated: The truth about global temperature data | Ars Technica

Climate Analysis | Remote Sensing Systems

And this is the latest article on the problem of diurnal satellite measurements of the upper troposphere.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by RPETER65

someone who has no clue about intelligent design

I know that it's not a science.

It's pseudo-science. At best.

It's creationism playing dress up and pretending to be science.

Call it what it is: Religious mumbo jumbo.

You call it what you want, I'll call it what is,creation.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by RPETER65

someone who has no clue about intelligent design

I know that it's not a science.

It's pseudo-science. At best.

It's creationism playing dress up and pretending to be science.

Call it what it is: Religious mumbo jumbo.

You call it what you want, I'll call it what is,creation.

Yes that's fine.

You can call your crackpot fairy tale whatever you like, just don't try and dress it up as science.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Call it what it is: Religious mumbo jumbo.

You call it what you want, I'll call it what is,creation.

Yes, that's what harry said.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by RPETER65

someone who has no clue about intelligent design

I know that it's not a science.

It's pseudo-science. At best.

It's creationism playing dress up and pretending to be science.

Call it what it is: Religious mumbo jumbo.

You call it what you want, I'll call it what is,creation.

Yes that's fine.

You can call your crackpot fairy tale whatever you like, just don't try and dress it up as science.

You just keep believing

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

I know that it's not a science.

It's pseudo-science. At best.

It's creationism playing dress up and pretending to be science.

Call it what it is: Religious mumbo jumbo.

You call it what you want, I'll call it what is,creation.

Yes that's fine.

You can call your crackpot fairy tale whatever you like, just don't try and dress it up as science.

You just keep believing

You see, you're getting all confused again.

Your nutjob Jesus-was-around-with-the-dinosaurs shit is based on a BELIEF system.

Science is essentially an EVIDENTIAL system.

Do you want me to explain that to you? I mean one of them is quite a long word, isn't it?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Call it what it is: Religious mumbo jumbo.

You call it what you want, I'll call it what is,creation.

Yes that's fine.

You can call your crackpot fairy tale whatever you like, just don't try and dress it up as science.

You just keep believing

You see, you're getting all confused again.

Your nutjob Jesus-was-around-with-the-dinosaurs shit is based on a BELIEF system.

Science is essentially an EVIDENTIAL system.

Do you want me to explain that to you? I mean one of them is quite a long word, isn't it?

As I said you just keep believing.

^ Run from reality! You are the forum idiot.

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ Run from reality! You are the forum idiot.

Is that why I now have four greens and one red showing?