Media consensus

lee wrote on Sep 12^th, 2023 at 6:51pm:



Actually, it is you who hasn't got the foggiest and believe in crackpot theories like the one proposed by that idiotic QLD senator on the pressure of greenhouse gases causing warming. 

No one in their right minds, and not the overwhelming majority of scientists and scientific institutions, dispute that the Earth's climate is changing, primarily due to human activities, and that this change poses significant risks to the environment and human societies. This consensus is based on extensive research and data collected by climate scientists around the world.

The climate change consensus is supported by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists and scientific organizations. Organizations such as The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), World Meteorological Organization (WMO), The Royal Society, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) have consistently affirmed the reality of human-induced climate change. Thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies contribute to this consensus.

One of the primary reasons for believing in the consensus is the extensive evidence of global warming. Average global temperatures have risen over the past century, with the last few decades experiencing particularly rapid warming. This warming trend is supported by a variety of temperature measurements, including surface temperature records, satellite data, and ice core sample.

The consensus is also based on the understanding that human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas), deforestation, and industrial processes, are releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. These gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4), trap heat and contribute to the greenhouse effect, leading to increased global temperatures.

Climate scientists rely on multiple lines of evidence, including not only temperature data but also changes in sea level, ocean acidity, and shifts in weather patterns. These various indicators consistently point to a changing climate driven by human activities.

Climate models, based on our understanding of physical and chemical processes in the atmosphere, have successfully reproduced past climate trends and are used to make future climate projections. These models have been validated against historical data and have proven to be reliable tools for predicting future climate changes.

Scientific research on climate change is subject to rigorous peer review by experts in the field. The fact that the consensus has withstood such scrutiny adds to its credibility.

International agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, are based on the climate change consensus. Countries around the world have recognized the need to take action to mitigate and adapt to climate change, further indicating the global acceptance of this consensus.

The consensus also draws strength from the observed and projected consequences of climate change, including rising sea levels, more frequent and severe heatwaves, changing precipitation patterns, and disruptions to ecosystems. These impacts are already being felt in various regions.

Keep pissing in the ocean, Lee, you still haven't  raised its level. 

And here's a heads up.......you never will.

Linus wrote on Sep 17^th, 2023 at 3:01am:


Fallacious again. Climate models are tuned to the past. And not very well.

Linus wrote on Sep 17^th, 2023 at 3:01am:


They are peer-reviewed by their fellow travellers. It is called PAL reviewed.

Linus wrote on Sep 17^th, 2023 at 3:01am:


Rubbish. The Paris Agreement was governments not scientists.  It would be far cheaper to adapt than mitigate, and they haven't worked that out yet.

Linus wrote on Sep 17^th, 2023 at 3:01am:


There has been no acceleration in SLR, it has been ongoing for thousands of years.  So what is the heatwave temperature where you live. It varies in the UK - 28C to Sydney- generally 30C.

Linus wrote on Sep 17^th, 2023 at 3:01am:


That's good to know. Barack Obama will be pleased his seaside mansion is safe, as well as Al Gore and other numpties.

You seem like freediver with the brains removed. You accept any notion that agrees with your biases.

Linus wrote on Sep 17^th, 2023 at 5:58pm:



Yep they have all signed onto the 97%. You can't fix stupid.

Climate change is real. When has climate change not been real?

Linus wrote on Sep 17^th, 2023 at 5:58pm:


Unlike you where you are a waste of oxygen.

It seems JM is on the wacky weed. According to a paper he selected and on which he wrote glowingly - CO2 is not plant food. Moreover the paper supports a water vapour decrease in the atmosphere. Strangely CO2 theory disagrees. According to CO2 theory, water vapour should increase by 7% per 1C temperature change, and we have already had 1.5C.

Poor Linus, Still loving the 97%. Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 6:03pm:


Thousands of years? Rubbish. CO2c last about 5 years.

"Because the oceans suck up huge amounts of the gas each year, the average CO2 molecule does spend about 5 years in the atmosphere."

https://www.nature.com/articles/climate.2008.122

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 6:03pm:


There are any amount Happer, Clauser etc. I know you defer to Michal Mann.

Lee - calm and factual.

Linus et al - emotional, incontinent.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:


Ok then CO2 is a stable gas with an impact lasting about 5 years. And the thousands of years? You want to forget about The Roman, The Minoan, The Holocene Optimum and the Mediaeval Warm Period? You can't even relate to your preferences.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:


And?  What exactly has it done. BTW- The Keeling curve doesn't go back that far. And it hasn't reached anywhere near 480ppm. And the "around 280ppm"? That is theoretical, working backwards with many uncertainties.

So once again, you prove you don't know what you are talking about.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:


So what exactly have the climate impacts been from increased CO2? And no, attribution "science", is not science but computer games.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:


And yet somehow he won a Nobel Prize, go figure. 

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:



Oh dear, Linus exposes his conspiracy theory roots.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:


I don't need to you have a fistful of nothing. Someone has been p*ssing in your pocket and told you it is raining.