Posted on 05/21/2016 6:39:09 AM PDT by rktman
But the “97 percent of scientists believe in global warming” mantra became gospel on May 16, 2013, when President Obama tweeted “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.”
What the president was referring to was a 2013 paper by the University of Queensland’s John Cook. In his research, Cook studied 11,994 papers published between 1991 and 2011 that mentioned the search words “global warming” and “global climate change.”
Guess what Cook actually found? Only 32.6 percent of the papers endorsed the view of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. But of that group, 97 percent said that “recent warming is mostly man-made.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I never thought that you did have anything “to do with it.” You have never given any indication that you have any knowledge whatsoever about scientific method or inquiry. The only thing you appear to be capable of is parroting “talking points”. Sadly, you are not even good at that. You have shared nothing at all of any substance during our entire conversation. The only thing that I expect from you is more name calling, insults and appeals to authority. Very, very pathetic.
You had better start praying at the global warming alter. It appears that the greatest El Niño ever has already fizzled. Satellite data will most likely be showing that the unpredicted pause in warming that started 20 years ago will continue to lengthen. However I have no doubt that none of the empirical evidence will ever manage to put a dent in you faith.
And 9 out of 10 experts polled said that most experts are wrong.
And 96% of people die within six months of their birthday.......
I will bid adieu to you with the following:
“There is a saying in the world of science that if scientific facts do not support your arguments then stop shouting. It is thus a waste of time to appeal to “scientism” or to rely on popular spokespersons like Al Gore or Bill Nye to make it look otherwise.
It will do more harm to your own self-esteem than the pretension of winning an argument by appealing to authority or popularity. Increasingly, we are seeing more and more outrageous and aggressive anti-scientific claims that anyone who is not willing to embrace the dangerous global warming bandwagon and to condemn its culprit, CO2, is actually the equivalent of a Holocaust Denier.
This sort of name-calling, loud self-promotion and fact twisting actions, closer to political rodeo than to healthy scientific debates, are simply telling us that our opponents have already lost their fallacious arguments and are getting short on any real scientific facts.
Professor Albert Einstein had it perfectly right. When he was told about the publication of the pamphlet “100 authors against Einstein” in 1931, he replied: “Why 100? If I were wrong, one would be enough.”
It is fitting to hear the comment of Professor Hubert Goenner about the three main editors/contributors of “100 authors against Einstein”:
“
Obviously, these three men were united not only by their common interest in philosophy and opposition to relativity theory but also by their incompetence in the fields of mathematics and physics.”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/24/bill-nyes-scientism/
I’m really proud of my humility.
The preceding post was intended for Ben Ficklin.
This was a big part of the “denier” documentary “Climate Hustle.” People who don’t know the scientific stuff told me that this was the most effective argument in the movie.
So, if we had the time and access to the documents, we could probably (using verifiable methods) come up with the same findings? Either way, it’s gonna cost somebody (US) money no matter what.
If you knew anything about science, you would know that that nobody can prove global warming, just like nobody can prove gravity.
In that respect, everyone is a skeptic when it comes to global warming, including me. Skepticism is a matter of degree. The more skeptical one is, the more evidence is needed. And no matter how much evidence has accumulated to support, there is always the possibility that at some future time the evidence will show otherwise.
But there are those who go beyond being skeptical, and they are called deniers. For them, it makes no difference how much evidence has accumulated, they will always deny.
And there are ways of identifying deniers.
For example: your use of the word "faith" in the above quote indicates that you are a denier.
A second example is your use of the phrase "20 year pause" indicates that you are a denier.
A third example would be your use of Tony Watts/Watts Up With That as a credible source indicates that you are a denier.
A fourth example is your attempt to pass yourself off as an expert climate guru based solely on the fact that you are in hazmat and know what an oxidizer is and are acquainted with material safety data sheets, plus you like to fool around with hang gliders.
In spite of your insistence that I prove it to you, it is not my job to do that. And the fact that you are known denier, means that even the Omniscient and Allknowing Lord God Almighty couldn't prove it to you.
Your repeated name calling associating me with those who deny that the Nazi holocaust did not occur is both sickening and ample evidence that you have no valid argument. You really are an embarrassment to yourself.
And yes satellites data shows clearly that there has been a 20 year pause in the warming trend that has been taking place since the end of the “little ice age” which occurred n the 17th century. The “pause” has been acknowledged by both the IPCC and the even the “scientists” such as Phil Jones, former head of the CRU at the University of East Anglia who was caught up in the “Climategate scandal.
Even more damning than the satellite data is the fact that since that time multiple efforts have been made to “adjust” ground based data to continue in the words of Michael Mann “hide the decline”. Mann is the person who came up with the now completely disproven “Hockey Stick” graph used in Al Gore's movie “An Inconvenient Truth”. A movie which was demonstrated to have so many factual errors that when it is shown in Great Britain to school children that the courts there have required that the kids also be given information pointing out the inaccuracies.
In spite of your insistence that I prove it to you, it is not my job to do that. And the fact that you are known denier, means that even the Omniscient and Allknowing Lord God Almighty couldn't prove it to you
I have never asked you to “prove” anything o me. You have shown repeatedly that you are incapable of even carrying on a rational discussion. All I have asked you for is any argument that you might have that would support your belief system. Which you still have not attempted even once. You just have continued your name calling and attacks but have never made any attempt at all to explain your position. Not even once.
I challenge to go through all that you have written and find even one quote from yourself where you have attempted to explain why it is you believe that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 are the primary driver of the earths temperatures, or have even a major influence. You do not have to "prove" anything... just give us your argument, preferably minus the name calling.
The climate has never been stable on this earth. We live near Seattle. Less than 10,000 years ago the entire region where we live was covered in ice which was thousands of feet thick. 10,000 years is but a flash in geologic time. Thank goodness we are currently living in a precious interglacial period where the climate is now warmer.
I am not actually sure what you think that I “deny”. I believe in observational data and the conclusions that can be drawn from the data. There has not been a good correlation between rising CO2 levels and the earth's temperature as measured by satellites. There has not even been a good correlation between rising CO2 levels and ground based data that has been revised multiple times by agencies under the control of the Obama administration. So I will repeat the quote from my last post that you seem to have missed.
“There is a saying in the world of science that if scientific facts do not support your arguments then stop shouting. It is thus a waste of time to appeal to “scientism” or to rely on popular spokespersons like Al Gore or Bill Nye to make it look otherwise.
It will do more harm to your own self-esteem than the pretension of winning an argument by appealing to authority or popularity. Increasingly, we are seeing more and more outrageous and aggressive anti-scientific claims that anyone who is not willing to embrace the dangerous global warming bandwagon and to condemn its culprit, CO2, is actually the equivalent of a Holocaust Denier.
This sort of name-calling, loud self-promotion and fact twisting actions, closer to political rodeo than to healthy scientific debates, are simply telling us that our opponents have already lost their fallacious arguments and are getting short on any real scientific facts.
Professor Albert Einstein had it perfectly right. When he was told about the publication of the pamphlet “100 authors against Einstein” in 1931, he replied: “Why 100? If I were wrong, one would be enough.”
It is fitting to hear the comment of Professor Hubert Goenner about the three main editors/contributors of “100 authors against Einstein”:
“Obviously, these three men were united not only by their common interest in philosophy and opposition to relativity theory but also by their incompetence in the fields of mathematics and physics.””
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/24/bill-nyes-scientism/
Obama did the same thing with college rape statistics, declaring that 1 in 5 (20%) of women are raped in college.
This is totally false. But it keeps getting repeated.
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.