Comments on: Two incontrovertible things: Anthropogenic Global Warming is Real, and the Wall Street Journal is Political Rag UPDATED

By: Craig Thomas

Craig Thomas — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 06:00:56 +0000

Thanks to “Jimme” for this one:

“At what point do you fools give up?”

Something to ponder, indeed…

By: Craig Thomas

Craig Thomas — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 05:58:01 +0000

“…Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists”.

Impressive-sounding organisation…except from what I gather its activities involve about 5 scientists, most of them fascinated by perpetual motion machines.,

By: Mal Adapted

Mal Adapted — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 19:27:12 +0000

Timothy Beneke:

But please explain to me why the global earth's temperature has remained stable for 15 years, when greenhouse gases have increased.

Who told you it's been stable? It's still going up. Take a look at this article, especially figure 1. It's an animated gif, so be sure to watch it for a few seconds.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 19:17:48 +0000

“But please explain to me why the global earth’s temperature has remained stable for 15 years, when greenhouse gases have increased.”

What is your basis for saying that?

“Stop ranting and explain this please.”

I’ll give you a pass on that for 24 hours while you try to support your assertion.

Looking at my watch … starting now. Better get movin, Timothy.

By: Timothy Beneke

Timothy Beneke — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:13:23 +0000

I am not a scientist and make no claim to being well informed on global warming. I do not take consensus in science (or any field) seriously, having observed too much. But please explain to me why the global earth’s temperature has remained stable for 15 years, when greenhouse gases have increased. Presumably there are other causal forces keeping the temperature down. Or 15 years is too short a time frame and this is an effect of “randomness” which still must be explained causally. Yes, the temperature went up and has stayed up; but it has remained stable for 15 years. Stop ranting and explain this please.

By: Wow

Wow — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 17:55:43 +0000

The alternative would be that there is no agreement on what constitutes reality.

Therefore I can assert that this chocolate bar in my hand is actually solid gold.

And if I can’t find any people agreeing with my assertion, this is PROOF it’s solid gold!!!

This, of course, is the fundie right method of science: take the word of any single human being who disagrees with people you don’t like and you agree with them.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:15:19 +0000

Funny because it seems like NASA and east Anglia have just admitted that there has been no Warming in the last 15 years and that there is a great possibility that the Thames will freeze over again.

No, they didn’t. Did you read any of this material at all? I’m thinking not.

By: Lotharsson

Lotharsson — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:14:16 +0000

...because it seems like NASA and east Anglia have just admitted that there has been no Warming in the last 15 years and that there is a great possibility that the Thames will freeze over again.

Ah, I see someone else is gullible enough to believe David Rose, who (if you follow the links in that search) has a history of misrepresentation and error. And in this specific case, the Met Office have issued a strongly worded statement asserting that Rose has made numerous errors and that his article is misleading. I bet you can find a number of other evidence-based critiques of his claims too - if you aren't so foolish as to pretend that his word is gospel. And given the evidence about Rose's historical accuracy and your unskeptical repetition of easily debunked claims, perhaps you should find better sources "before you get burned" yourself?

By: Jimme

Jimme — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 06:42:22 +0000

Funny because it seems like NASA and east Anglia have just admitted that there has been no Warming in the last 15 years and that there is a great possibility that the Thames will freeze over again. We now need to worry about an Ice age and the 25 cycle. Looks like this whole AGW ship is on fire better get off now before you get burned.

At what point do you fools give up?

By: TTT

TTT — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:30:43 +0000

Note that by sadreader’s “logic,” it is actually impossible for climate change to have been caused by sunspots, because since the sun is still hot enough to kill you it hasn’t changed.