Jump to content

Global warming err Climate change HOAX


Recommended Posts

"It is an indisputable fact that carbon emissions are rising, and faster than most scientists have predicted,"

 

"But many climate-change alarmists seem to claim that all climate change is worse than expected.

 

This ignores that much of the data are actually encouraging. The latest study from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that in the previous 15 years temperatures had risen 0.09 degrees Fahrenheit. The average of all models expected 0.8 degrees. So we’re seeing about 90% less temperature rise than expected."

So begins Bjorn Lomberg's WSJ piece "The Alarming Thing About Climate Alarmism/Exaggerated, worst-case claims result in bad policy and they ignore a wealth of encouraging data."

 

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 7.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"It is an indisputable fact that carbon emissions are rising, and faster than most scientists have predicted,"

 

"But many climate-change alarmists seem to claim that all climate change is worse than expected.

 

This ignores that much of the data are actually encouraging. The latest study from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that in the previous 15 years temperatures had risen 0.09 degrees Fahrenheit. The average of all models expected 0.8 degrees. So we’re seeing about 90% less temperature rise than expected."

 

So begins Bjorn Lomberg's WSJ piece "The Alarming Thing About Climate Alarmism/Exaggerated, worst-case claims result in bad policy and they ignore a wealth of encouraging data."

 

 

 

 

.

hmmm... the wsj andlomberg: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/06/25/3453053/koch-bjorn-lomborg-lousy-t-shirt/. this is what should arouse skepticism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Of Course.............................

 

 

of-course.jpg?w=585

 

 

It's the Koch Brothers fault !.................................lol

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bjørn Lomborg is the director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center and a former director of the Environmental Assessment Institute in Copenhagen.
.

 

"In January, 2003, the DCSD released a ruling that sent a mixed message, finding the book to be scientifically dishonest through misrepresentation of scientific facts, but Lomborg himself not guilty due to his lack of expertise in the fields in question..."

 

he's a political scientist. he's funded by far right propaganda companies and hew's been formally investigated for academic dishonesty with the above cited findings. and you find his opinions on this compelling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

p8F3zTc.jpg

 

But how do we know Phil's shadow wasn't from all the stage lights surrounding him as part of this whole ceremony? Punxsutawney Phil's forecasting model is deeply flawed. And it's such a commercialized forecast, we know he's corrupted by money.

 

The rodent gets the same skepticism from me as the climatologists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean climate change evidence like this?

 

CMIP5-73-models-vs-obs-20N-20S-MT-5-yr-m

Only in America do we accept the word of someone with credentials when the evidence that proves they are full of it is staring us right in the face.

not only in america. i thought kyoto was on another continent. and it was only NOT america, almost...

 

i find this graph interesting: http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/SLR_models_obs.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not only in america. i thought kyoto was on another continent. and it was only NOT america, almost...

 

i find this graph interesting: http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/SLR_models_obs.gif

 

Oceans have been rising since the end of the last ice age. You still can't prove my SUV is to blame.

Edited by Gary M
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Oceans have been rising since the end of the last ice age. You still can't prove my SUV is to blame.

i can't prove that you evolved from pond scum but it seems pretty likely.

 

and food for thought. why are there so many lomborgs on the skeptic side. and why do they have access to print in large, widely read conservative publications?

Edited by birdog1960
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i can't prove that you evolved from pond scum but it seems pretty likely.

 

and food for thought. why are there so many lomborgs on the skeptic side. and why do they have access to print in large, widely read conservative publications?

More climate change news.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/650-drought-triggered-ancient-citys-abandonment-135024933.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...