Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: GoneSalt

You are most certainly correct.

NO true scientist would even come close to climate change.

Why?

1. Inability to analyze data...and generate appropriate error bars.
2. Principal Component analysis? Waz dat?
3. Never let data get in the way of a conclusion.
4. Analysis of how far IR absorbtion got 100 years ago vs today? Nah?
5. Computer models that actually predicted anything? Negativo.
6. Revealed emails showing complicity with item 3? Yup
7. Where’s that “ice free” Arctic, Obamahole?
8. And oh yeah, there’s the record setting ice in the Antartic.

Want more?

Lots more, but first, you might try getting a passing grade in “Physics for Poets” and then we can get on to some real science.

Bring it, oh liberal mathphobe.


47 posted on 08/03/2015 5:20:54 PM PDT by Da Coyote (Di)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Da Coyote
You might find this enjoyable.

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2009/12/fables-of-the-reconstruction.html

Nice touch on IR absorption. Not to mention, what was the global temperature and ppm of CO2 in the Jurassic?

Oh, really? Without SUVs...oh. The dinosaurs knew they would *become* fossil fuels and preemptively warmed the atmosphere millions of years in advance.

There have been dinosaur fossils found in what is now Alaska (Pachycephalosaurs, I thought it was). How did we get glaciation? What happened to runaway feedback?

74 posted on 08/04/2015 8:58:23 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson