Posted on 06/12/2018 12:56:50 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Global climate change
Global SCAM!
Oh indeed
Don’t look at the volcanoes
Yes, they’re pivoting. It’s not the warming now, it’s the new theories put into “new computer models” that shows crazy weather “might” happen. They get ever more vague with the ever more increasing need for “more research” and funds!
Funny for a “science” that is settled!
These people are the biggest frauds ever.
The optimum CO2 percentage for many of our food plants is 1000 ppm. Right now its only 400 ppm.
We need to drive this up.
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a giant nuclear furnace that controls the climates of all its planets.
3. The earth is one of the sun’s planets.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
Yeah, well no shite Sherlock. When you can accurately predict, say just one year in advance, when and where hurricanes will strike then get back to me.
Because the old climate models were nothing but ... models.
Physicist Howard Hayden's one-letter disproof of global warming claims [pre-Climategate]Dear Administrator Jackson:
I write in regard to the Proposed Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, Proposed Rule, 74 Fed. Reg. 18,886 (Apr. 24, 2009), the so-called "Endangerment Finding."
It has been often said that the "science is settled" on the issue of CO2 and climate. Let me put this claim to rest with a simple one-letter proof that it is false.
The letter is s, the one that changes model into models. If the science were settled, there would be precisely one model, and it would be in agreement with measurements.
Alternatively, one may ask which one of the twenty-some models settled the science so that all the rest could be discarded along with the research funds that have kept those models alive.
We can take this further. Not a single climate model predicted the current cooling phase. If the science were settled, the model (singular) would have predicted it.
(excerpted from Professor Hayden's letter to Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator Environmental Protection Agency. More at link.)
WHOW, ANOTHER “MODEL”; ANOTHER “STUDY”;WHOW, I’M SOOOOOO IMPRESSED! NOT!
I fail to understand why these ‘wizards of smart’ haven’t done something about dihydrogen oxide, which has historically killed more people that any gas.
Tales from the Normals: "Tales from the Chicken Littles don't pass the smell test. Whatever is causing that smell is the cause of their nonsense. I would guess it is feculence of the chicken kind."
If all the climate scientists and other scammers held their breath for a few minutes, CO2 would plummet.
O.K., the need new scenario for same the old agenda, because “warming” may be less than the claimed catastrophe, so they have to look for a new “warning” for CO2 alone, even if “warming” is not so bad. That’s what the new “science” search is to be about - find something new to blame on CO2.
They never give up.
We can’t even control a lava flow and they think they can control the climate.
What nonsense.
The climate models missed the pause in temperature rise. So climate modelers change the models, which, we are now told, accurately predict the much more complex and unknown interactions with clouds, sunlight, and weather systems.
WTF?
Climate models simply cannot accurately predict on this level. They haven’t even been able to predict on overall temperature. They have never been validated, because it would take a century or two to validate them.
This is fantasy stuff.
The desire of liberals to control literally everything never ends. Now they want to control the climate after telling us it made changes naturally on its own.
This will not end well.
I call fake “science”.
How could increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from 0.0% to 0.0% possibly cause Armageddon?
I miss real science, when actual measurements were used in a search for empirical truth.
Nowadays, “scientists” feverishly seek to find “correlations” between data sets so they can claim “causation”.
Lysenko would be proud.
If it was an ingredient in crackers, at that % it would be so "trace" it wouldn't even be listed on the box.
I don't know why autocorrect erased the "2"!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.