Quick primer for the believers in AGW.


Active Member
That's a couple, and they're not even climatologists: One's an aerospace engineer ( whose been funded by the Koch Foundation) and the other a geologist (whose assertions were very well refuted by Brian Cox in a video earlier in this thread). Yeah, you're right they're scientists, which is irrelevant - why not get some papers from a volcanologist or herpetologist?

How about the hundreds, maybe thousands of actual climatologists, who can and do prove the stupidity of these people? It's a question you ignore, except to suggest that all of them are paid by some supposed big money that benefits from proving climate change. Obviously and provably untrue, as a counterpoint to how their opposition are funded.

You keep dredging up the same types of pseudo-science and posing it as the real thing. It is not.

I'll ask again: show me a vast, overwhelming majority of strong, peer-reviewed science showing that man has no influence on global climate change. You simply cannot.

Done and done.
I'll just leave this here:


"The current epoch, the Holocene, is the 12,000 years of stable climate since the last ice age during which all human civilization developed. But the striking acceleration since the mid-20th century of carbon dioxide emissions and sea level rise, the global mass extinction of species, and the transformation of land by deforestation and development mark the end of that slice of geological time, the experts argue. The Earth is so profoundly changed that the Holocene must give way to the Anthropocene."


Active Member
Pretty confident (not sure though) the planet used to exist as a single chunk of land surrounded by water. Referred to as Gondwana or Gondwanaland. The earth had one land mass above the water. This planet has been changing since the big bang or Gaia or God made it.

This planet has never stopped changing! There has never been a stable earth or a stable climate and there never will be. If you believe removing the human population from the planet will stop the changing you are extremely confused.

Once again, science...including all peer reviewed published papers have NEVER demonstrated their predictive capacity, they have all failed and failed every time. We have a theory that human CO2 emission must raise the earths temperature but we have no, none, data showing so and no successful predictions. This ain't science folks, it's failed predictions and failed theories.

Here's more, the search for truth does not apply to climate science!
The non-science of today!
Last edited:

Alex MacDonald

that's His Lordship, to you.....
Beat me to it, Klickrolf!! Yet another log on the fire of "academic" bullshit. This sort of garbage was just beginning to take place when I retired.


Active Member
Well, at least you're not a Creationist, I'll give that to you.
And there it is... our reminder that there is a group of individuals in this country that gets chastised more frequently (and with less cause) than the climate deniers.

It may surprise some of you to learn that the Christian church holds the position that environmental issues are very important. We figure it's not God's will that we destroy his creation to indulge our sin nature.

Before anyone jumps on the giant fast ball I just floated you and goes ad hominem on me, I am well aware that the politicians claiming to be Christians today (a collection of bumbling idiots using the name of God to garner votes) don't make it appear that the Church is pro-environment. Rest assured they are politicians before anything, which means they stand for nothing but their own interests in the end.

Contentious issue, for sure. I take more of a Cliff Mass approach to the argument. The best science available points to AGW being a real thing. Sensational viewpoints, on both sides of the argument, are likely wrong. More likely, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, or, that there is an anthropomorphic effect on climate, but its overall influence is not likely as significant as the hardcores would have you believe.

All this aside, when we look at the smog in our air, even in remote areas, after long periods of high atmospheric pressure, can some of us honestly not see a very real, tangible reason why we should stop burning fossil fuels? No matter what you believe about global warming, can you deny that the status quo is choking us all to a slow death?


Active Member
This is the intellectual laziness that passes for science in the CAGW group - Nobody handed me the report, so instead of finding a copy myself, I'll just refute it. I showed you where to get it, the rest is your responsibility.
Fixed it for ya Bob, and I agree with you except for my "required" fix. Once again there is no substantiating data, only assumptions and guesses and failed predictions. If there were substantiating data it would be front page news in every newspaper worldwide, no one would need to "buy the understanding". Do you disagree?

Since many of you demand "peer review" in scientific journals you might "learn" something from this. Publishing is very important for those who receive government grants for their work...peer review has now demonstrated to fail as much or more than it self corrects.

That link only addresses real demonstrable and repeatable science. Climate change predictions have never become "science" because they've failed to predict anything, wrong on polar ice melt, wrong on sea level rise, wrong on catastrophic storms, wrong on ocean PH, wrong on CAGW! Who'd a thunk?

And a little more about the pause occurring while human release of CO2 has increased dramatically: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wor...y-alarmists-even-joe-romm-confirms-the-pause/
The link provides a link to this guys blog and pretty much puts it to bed. Remember, this is catastrophic, an increase of .074C degrees since 1998 but an overall cooling in 2016 to date of .07C since the 1998 El Nino.
El Nino's and La Nina's create weather spikes but they don't create climate, everyone agrees on this as far as I can determine.

More on the sun, if you can feel it warming you should be able to assume it causes warming. http://www.vencoreweather.com/blog/...re-important-than-we-though-on-earths-climate.

And finally, since I've wasted an hour on this, I could have been fishing, I'll leave you with this nice little paper titled "The Spuriousness of Correlations Between Cumulative Values". http://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery...7102071006120122020112069010110098013&EXT=pdf

Latest posts