Another way of reinforcing to one's self that you possess SECRET KNOWLEDGE is to paint anybody who disagrees with you as a hypocrite, who can therefore be disergarded, according to criteria that you alone, despite your lack of formal training, are able to prescribe. After all, why wouldn't you be able to prescribe that criteria? You have SECRET KNOWLEDGE - this is far better than formal training or education, in fact you could found a religion based on it - that's how they're founded -- who better than to do it than you, the possessor of SECRET KNOWLEDGE?
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hphdsLcSTYQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Ouch, you got me there. Maybe I should work on distinguishing the difference between Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and also work on reading links provided in articles about maternal mortality as well as the findings of leading gynecologists here in Texas. Thanks.
I have no anger or frustration for any member here. This is not a debate it is a religious discussion.
From what I remember, the IPCC states that the earliest date for an ice-free Arctic summer is 2040 and most likely by 2090. Are you ready to join me in calling out these asshat's with their juvenile projections? Though I suppose we still have a year or two. I do hope you join me in a year or two. [rQUOTEr]‘Next year or the year after, the Arctic will be free of ice’ Scientist Peter Wadhams believes the summer ice cover at the north pole is about to disappear, triggering even more rapid global warming Peter Wadhams has spent his career in the Arctic, making more than 50 trips there, some in submarines under the polar ice. He is credited with being one of the first scientists to show that the thick icecap that once covered the Arctic ocean was beginning to thin and shrink. He was director of the Scott Polar Institute in Cambridge from 1987 to 1992 and professor of ocean physics at Cambridge since 2001. His book, A Farewell to Ice, tells the story of his unravelling of this alarming trend and describes what the consequences for our planet will be if Arctic ice continues to disappear at its current rate.[/rQUOTEr]
You cherry pick with the weirdest derails...as if splitting hairs invalidates an entire point buttressed by copious on the ground, increasingly precise satellite and mathematical data. That scientist isn't some Archpope of Truthery that I have to denounce or uhh disavow. Even if I did, I'm not sure what that validates in your worldview. Please enlighten me on what the membership benefits on whatever it is that you want me to join. NOAA and the IPCC are still consistent with their claims of the ice caps receding and causing consequential rises in sea level. The main fear isn't a matter of precisely when but whether magnification through warming and decreased albedo from lost ice results in less polar freezes in subsequent years. So what is going on in the Arctic and Greenland again?
Well that's all folks like Red Rocket can do..... Latch out onto to a claim and dissect the hell out of it without realizing that there is a range of likely outcomes. I don't like all the alarmism by the IPCC, which adds fuel to folks like Red Rocket and Okie, but there has been no evidence to suggest that man's actions aren't having an effect on climate.
I have no idea what point you were trying to make. The researcher was wrong, and feel free to answer your own question.
By the way, Hermine was the first hurricane to make landfall in Florida in 10 years. [sarcasm]Must have been global warming, right? I'm sure Bloomberg magazine will put it on their next front cover.[/sarcasm]
The current theory is that warmer SST leader to fewer, but more intense hurricanes. However, trying to apply that to any one given situation isn't the way science works. You have to look at longer term trends - one storm doesn't make or break anything. You have a terrible habit of using a single example of weather to try to define climate.
A major hurricane hasn't made landfall in the US in 10 years. There was a near two decade pause in global warming. And the global warming of the past 40 years correlates fairly well with SSTA in the tropical Pacific. It is not just "one" event or a "single" event that has lead me to doubt some of the claims alarmists have been making. Take a look at professor McAsshat - not only does is still stick by his incorrect projections but he believes that he and his colleagues are being 'targeted' (as in assassinated).
What's your reasoning with the information in this video? <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hphdsLcSTYQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Right now Global Warming does predict that there would be fewer hurricanes but also keep in mind the there is a difference between global warming and the effects of global warming. Global Warming is happening. There was no "pause" as you like to talk about. Things don't happen linearly for many reasons. But the overall trend is up and up. We've had 20 straight months of increasing global temperature. And the only cause is mankind. There is really no doubt about this. The question is why in face of overwhelming evidence do you still cling to the delusion that it is not happening?
You're talking out of your ass as usual. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/E11.html 165 years of tracking. Please find the trend in this data.
