Global warming discussion IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is everyone mindlessly, ignorant and deluded who disagree with the Warmists view RC ? :D

Is everyone mindlessly, ignorant and deluded who disagree with the evolutionist view Haig ? :D

Is everyone mindlessly, ignorant and deluded who disagree with the Holocaust view Haig ? :D

Is everyone mindlessly, ignorant and deluded who disagree with the materialist view Haig ? :D

Is everyone mindlessly, ignorant and deluded who disagree with the Warren report view Haig ? :D


Yes, actually, because if they weren't ignorant they wouldn't disagree with it.
 
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...global-temperature-data-are-breaking-records?

Just today, NASA released its global temperature data for the month of May 2015. It was a scorching 0.71°C (1.3°F) above the long-term average. It is also the hottest first five months of any year ever recorded. As we look at climate patterns over the next year or so, it is likely that this year will set a new all-time record. In fact, as of now, 2015 is a whopping 0.1°C (0.17°F) hotter than last year, which itself was the hottest year on record.

Below, NASA’s annual temperatures are shown. Each year’s results are shown as black dots. Some years are warmer, some are cooler and we never want to put too much emphasis on any single year’s temperature. I have added a star to show where 2015 is so far this year, simply off the chart. The last 12 months are at record levels as well. So far June has been very hot as well, likely to end up warmer than May.

picture.php
 
Last edited:
I'm still trying to figure out what exactly it is that he's for, more neighbors legally and illegally immigrating in to his area, the increasing costs of living, increased disease and weather related disaster, global turmoil and war, skyrocketing food and energy prices? What exactly about global warming is he for?

Warmer weather, mostly :p
 
How climate change deniers got it right

How climate change deniers got it right — but very wrong
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/how-climate-change-deniers-got-it-very-wrong

It turns out the climate change deniers were right: There isn’t 97% agreement among climate scientists. The real figure? It’s not lower, but actually higher.

The scientific “consensus” on climate change has gotten stronger, surging past the famous — and controversial — figure of 97% to more than 99.9%, according to a new study reviewed by msnbc.

James L. Powell, director of the National Physical Sciences Consortium, reviewed more than 24,000 peer-reviewed papers on global warming published in 2013 and 2014. Only five reject the reality of rising temperatures or the fact that human emissions are the cause, he found...

Hopefully the Pope has updated his encyclical to reflect this correction of the mainstream scientific position!
 
Number of papers is not the same as number of scientists.

Indeed, most papers are written by multiple scientists.

(most importantly to the understanding, if you aren't publishing in a journal over a period of a couple of years, you generally aren't considered an active researcher in the given field)
 
Last edited:
Number of papers is not the same as number of scientists.

Yes but the number of papers - or rather the amount of evidence - is actually much more relevant. Consensus of opinion is next to meaningless, whereas consensus of evidence is extraordinarily compelling.
 
Delingpole being the guy Sir Paul Nurse made look an absolute idiot in the Horizon programme "Science Under Attack"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom