Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
1 hour ago.
by Kendall78
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

Tiredofit

cited the following reconstructions supporting its conclusion that the 1990s was likely to have been the warmest Northern Hemisphere decade for 1,000 years:[2

IS LIKELY THE SAME AS PROOF

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

Sorry if I ask questions but this IS your source

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

I am QUOTING YOUR SOURCE

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

Has the HOCKEY STICK been show to be inaccurate?

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

Quantitative reconstructions have consistently shown earlier temperatures below the temperature levels reached in the late 20th century. This pattern as seen in Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 was dubbed the hockey stick graph, and as of 2010 this broad conclusion was supported by more than two dozen reconstructions, using various statistical methods and combinations of proxy records, with variations in how flat the pre-20th century "shaft" appears.[1]

Posted 11 days ago.

harryanderson

I knew you'd reject the 43 papers without looking at them.

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

.

The instrumental temperature record only covers the last 150 years at a hemispheric or global scale, and reconstructions of earlier periods are based on climate proxies

HMMM climate proxies are those factual?

Posted 11 days ago.

harryanderson

I'm on to solutions.

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

WIKIPEDIA? is that not open to anyone to author???

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

OK 2000 years is one thing but how about 12000

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

Boy, go to bed, you had your chance.

Posted 11 days ago.

harryanderson

"If the rate of warming is unprecedented as you state, that would be some level of proof that something is different about this warming trend, Please show where this data is"

Here's a list of 43 scientific papers showing the recent warming is unprecedented in the last 2000 years.

en.wikipedia****/wiki/List_of_large-scale_temperature_reconstructions_of_the_last_2,000_years

I know you won't bother to look at this scientific data, since you've said it's not a scientific debate.

Posted 11 days ago.

Kendall78

"how was this data gathered from 12000 years ago"

It must have came from the same place that told you what didn't happen back then..haha.

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

how was this data gathered from 12000 years ago

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

If the rate of warming is unprecedented as you state, that would be some level of proof that something is different about this warming trend, Please show where this data is

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

Kendall you had your chance, hush boy

Posted 11 days ago.

Kendall78

"TELL ME WHERE"

You mean after all these years...after all the times people have shown you...you have no idea where to look up the info or how?

Are you that stupid? I mean really..are you that mentally deficient?

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

Please provide the data that shows the rate of warming is unprecidented

Posted 11 days ago.

Tiredofit

How does the rate of warming today compare to 12000 years ago?

Posted 11 days ago.

Kendall78

@Harry- you know Tired won't accept that. It doesn't fall into his view of the world.

He'll probably say it's all political and the govt is making NASA say those things.

Of course ignoring the times that he used NASA for his own arguments.

He won't give an alternative explanation for why the temps are going up, he'll simple say what he believes is not causing it and smile stupidly like he accomplished something.

Posted 11 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or