Australian Politics Forum - Climate Change is back on

Bobby.

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 122762
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #180 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:44pm

Longweekend,
Quote:

i have zero concern over ACC because i see zero evidence of any climate change outside of historical norms. It has been hotter in the past, wetter and drier as well as colder. I still see no evidence of any tendency for climate to exceed these historical ranges. none at all.

Melbourne is boiling at the moment - day after day of high heat.
It's already ruined my 3 day long weekend.

Your name just reminds me of it.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #181 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:14pm

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Let's amuse progs and pretend the ocean is only 700m deep. If most of the heat is accumulating in the oceans, why is he claiming warming stopped 17 years ago, when he appears to accept the oceans have warmed significantly in this period of time.

http://cleanet.org/images/clean/community/workshops/communication2012/workspace/...

significantly???? you need to use a scale that is ultra small to even show the increase.

Go on, Longy. Tell us the period of time and how much heat you are talking about.

has it ever occured to you that for millenia past the oceans have bene heatsinks and temperature controllers over the variations in climatic conditions? the biosphere has suddenly started absorbing temperature into the oceans including colder deeper water coming up to the surface to improve heat absorption. So what does it mean?? it means that we suddenly discover that the oceasns absorb temperture and then make outlandish assumptions on what it means.

The biosphere is extraordinaly self regulating and moderating. Temperature rises from whatever means are handled automatically by feeback systems we know nothing about and in our arrogance, ignore. it is more than probable that whatever the real reasons are for the recent moderate increases in temperature, that the biosphere is respoding with its feedback systems to moderate it.

what we have zero evidence for is this notion of tipping points or catastrophic climate change. none whatsoever. all of these predictions are based on no response from the biosphere when there is clearly a great deal of it going on.

i have zero concern over ACC because i see zero evidence of any climate change outside of historical norms. It has been hotter in the past, wetter and drier as well as colder. I still see no evidence of any tendency for climate to exceed these historical ranges. none at all.

That clears things up considerably. You have a faith based position.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #182 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:22pm

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:14pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Let's amuse progs and pretend the ocean is only 700m deep. If most of the heat is accumulating in the oceans, why is he claiming warming stopped 17 years ago, when he appears to accept the oceans have warmed significantly in this period of time.

http://cleanet.org/images/clean/community/workshops/communication2012/workspace/...

significantly???? you need to use a scale that is ultra small to even show the increase.

Go on, Longy. Tell us the period of time and how much heat you are talking about.

has it ever occured to you that for millenia past the oceans have bene heatsinks and temperature controllers over the variations in climatic conditions? the biosphere has suddenly started absorbing temperature into the oceans including colder deeper water coming up to the surface to improve heat absorption. So what does it mean?? it means that we suddenly discover that the oceasns absorb temperture and then make outlandish assumptions on what it means.

The biosphere is extraordinaly self regulating and moderating. Temperature rises from whatever means are handled automatically by feeback systems we know nothing about and in our arrogance, ignore. it is more than probable that whatever the real reasons are for the recent moderate increases in temperature, that the biosphere is respoding with its feedback systems to moderate it.

what we have zero evidence for is this notion of tipping points or catastrophic climate change. none whatsoever. all of these predictions are based on no response from the biosphere when there is clearly a great deal of it going on.

i have zero concern over ACC because i see zero evidence of any climate change outside of historical norms. It has been hotter in the past, wetter and drier as well as colder. I still see no evidence of any tendency for climate to exceed these historical ranges. none at all.

That clears things up considerably. You have a faith based position.

AGW unproven = doomsday cultists are faith based believers.

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #183 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:59pm

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:14pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Let's amuse progs and pretend the ocean is only 700m deep. If most of the heat is accumulating in the oceans, why is he claiming warming stopped 17 years ago, when he appears to accept the oceans have warmed significantly in this period of time.

http://cleanet.org/images/clean/community/workshops/communication2012/workspace/...

significantly???? you need to use a scale that is ultra small to even show the increase.

Go on, Longy. Tell us the period of time and how much heat you are talking about.

has it ever occured to you that for millenia past the oceans have bene heatsinks and temperature controllers over the variations in climatic conditions? the biosphere has suddenly started absorbing temperature into the oceans including colder deeper water coming up to the surface to improve heat absorption. So what does it mean?? it means that we suddenly discover that the oceasns absorb temperture and then make outlandish assumptions on what it means.

The biosphere is extraordinaly self regulating and moderating. Temperature rises from whatever means are handled automatically by feeback systems we know nothing about and in our arrogance, ignore. it is more than probable that whatever the real reasons are for the recent moderate increases in temperature, that the biosphere is respoding with its feedback systems to moderate it.

what we have zero evidence for is this notion of tipping points or catastrophic climate change. none whatsoever. all of these predictions are based on no response from the biosphere when there is clearly a great deal of it going on.

i have zero concern over ACC because i see zero evidence of any climate change outside of historical norms. It has been hotter in the past, wetter and drier as well as colder. I still see no evidence of any tendency for climate to exceed these historical ranges. none at all.

That clears things up considerably. You have a faith based position.

you have an odd idea of what a 'faith based position' is. it is not faith to believe that the biosphere is self-regulating with a complex set of feedback mechanisms that regulate our environment. it is in fact a commonly held understanding. the problem with your lot of hysterics is that if you dont understand it and cant define it then it doesnt exist. That is why you simply cant cope with the 17 year pause in temperatures. you dont understand it, you dont expect it and therefore you just deny it.

do you think the notion of a self-regulating biosphere is so difficult?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #184 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 6:39pm

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:59pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:14pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

MOTR wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 5:30am:

Let's amuse progs and pretend the ocean is only 700m deep. If most of the heat is accumulating in the oceans, why is he claiming warming stopped 17 years ago, when he appears to accept the oceans have warmed significantly in this period of time.

http://cleanet.org/images/clean/community/workshops/communication2012/workspace/...

significantly???? you need to use a scale that is ultra small to even show the increase.

Go on, Longy. Tell us the period of time and how much heat you are talking about.

has it ever occured to you that for millenia past the oceans have bene heatsinks and temperature controllers over the variations in climatic conditions? the biosphere has suddenly started absorbing temperature into the oceans including colder deeper water coming up to the surface to improve heat absorption. So what does it mean?? it means that we suddenly discover that the oceasns absorb temperture and then make outlandish assumptions on what it means.

The biosphere is extraordinaly self regulating and moderating. Temperature rises from whatever means are handled automatically by feeback systems we know nothing about and in our arrogance, ignore. it is more than probable that whatever the real reasons are for the recent moderate increases in temperature, that the biosphere is respoding with its feedback systems to moderate it.

what we have zero evidence for is this notion of tipping points or catastrophic climate change. none whatsoever. all of these predictions are based on no response from the biosphere when there is clearly a great deal of it going on.

i have zero concern over ACC because i see zero evidence of any climate change outside of historical norms. It has been hotter in the past, wetter and drier as well as colder. I still see no evidence of any tendency for climate to exceed these historical ranges. none at all.

That clears things up considerably. You have a faith based position.

you have an odd idea of what a 'faith based position' is. it is not faith to believe that the biosphere is self-regulating with a complex set of feedback mechanisms that regulate our environment. it is in fact a commonly held understanding. the problem with your lot of hysterics is that if you dont understand it and cant define it then it doesnt exist. That is why you simply cant cope with the 17 year pause in temperatures. you dont understand it, you dont expect it and therefore you just deny it.

do you think the notion of a self-regulating biosphere is so difficult?

Not only do you have a faith based position, but you appear to be happy to tell lies to promote your "beliefs".

You claimed that :
the IPCC cheif said that there had been a 17 year paus in global warming

Still waiting to see the quote

Don't run away CTRL-x/CTRL-V

The only reference you have shown us so far says the exact opposite to what you claim. It claimed he said: it would need to last "30 to 40 years at least" to break the long-term global warming trend.

You appear to have been caught red-handed telling lies.

Don't you think is about time you owned up to this?

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #185 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 6:46pm

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

AGW unproven = doomsday cultists are faith based believers.

Can you explain to us why you blindly believe the Daliy Mail columnists silly opinion piece about "no global warming for 17 years"

when:
oceans continue to warm?
sea levels continue to rise?
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease?
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease?
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

Why are these things happening if - as your guru from the Daily Mail claims - there has been "no warming for 17 years"

You keep running away from this question. Why?
Can't your guru from the Daily Mail answer it?

I guess this is the problem when you get all of your opinions from journalists and shock jocks, isn't it.

When faced with a simple question based on logic - it all falls apart and makes you look like an idiot.

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

don't run away again. Try to answer this time.

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #186 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 7:10pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 6:46pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

AGW unproven = doomsday cultists are faith based believers.

Can you explain to us why you blindly believe the Daliy Mail columnists silly opinion piece about "no global warming for 17 years"

when:
oceans continue to warm?
sea levels continue to rise?
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease?
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease?
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

Why are these things happening if - as your guru from the Daily Mail claims - there has been "no warming for 17 years"

You keep running away from this question. Why?
Can't your guru from the Daily Mail answer it?

I guess this is the problem when you get all of your opinions from journalists and shock jocks, isn't it.

When faced with a simple question based on logic - it all falls apart and makes you look like an idiot.

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

don't run away again. Try to answer this time.

same crap, different day. you are just too stupid to read or understand.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #187 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 7:11pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 6:46pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

AGW unproven = doomsday cultists are faith based believers.

Can you explain to us why you blindly believe the Daliy Mail columnists silly opinion piece about "no global warming for 17 years"

when:
oceans continue to warm?
sea levels continue to rise?
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease?
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease?
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

Why are these things happening if - as your guru from the Daily Mail claims - there has been "no warming for 17 years"

You keep running away from this question. Why?
Can't your guru from the Daily Mail answer it?

I guess this is the problem when you get all of your opinions from journalists and shock jocks, isn't it.

When faced with a simple question based on logic - it all falls apart and makes you look like an idiot.

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

don't run away again. Try to answer this time.

I dont see where you get this david rose thing from. I refer to math. 0.5 = 0.5 and I have already answered this same question 3 times now and you just ignore it, so stuff u

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Climate Change is back on Reply #188 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:03pm You Are Here
Back to top	IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #189 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:35pm

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 7:11pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 6:46pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

AGW unproven = doomsday cultists are faith based believers.

Can you explain to us why you blindly believe the Daliy Mail columnists silly opinion piece about "no global warming for 17 years"

when:
oceans continue to warm?
sea levels continue to rise?
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease?
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease?
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

Why are these things happening if - as your guru from the Daily Mail claims - there has been "no warming for 17 years"

You keep running away from this question. Why?
Can't your guru from the Daily Mail answer it?

I guess this is the problem when you get all of your opinions from journalists and shock jocks, isn't it.

When faced with a simple question based on logic - it all falls apart and makes you look like an idiot.

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

don't run away again. Try to answer this time.

I dont see where you get this david rose thing from. I refer to math. 0.5 = 0.5 and I have already answered this same question 3 times now and you just ignore it, so stuff u

No you haven't "answered this same question 3 times now". Don't tell lies.

If you had you would link to where you have done this.

But you can't can you. You are just trying to run away again.

Please answer the question:

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

Or if you claim to have "answered this same question 3 times now" - show us an example. Show us you are not telling lies.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #190 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:42pm

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 7:11pm:

I dont see where you get this david rose thing from. I refer to math. 0.5 = 0.5 and I have already answered this same question 3 times now and you just ignore it, so stuff u

Yes you do. Don't deny it

You are parrotting an opinion piece by some Daily Mail columnist. That is where all this "no warming for 17 years " came from.

You may have got it second hand from Bolt or Alan Jones or some other crank - but you are mindlessly parrotting it nevertheless.

THis is why - why you are asked the simple question:

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years".

You run away, or tell lies like "I answered it already"
Your Daily Mail columnist did not give you an answer, did he. And you are incapable of thinking for yourself. So - you run away, or tell lies like "I answered it already"

Answer the question

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years".

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #191 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:43pm

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 7:10pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 6:46pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

AGW unproven = doomsday cultists are faith based believers.

Can you explain to us why you blindly believe the Daliy Mail columnists silly opinion piece about "no global warming for 17 years"

when:
oceans continue to warm?
sea levels continue to rise?
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease?
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease?
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

Why are these things happening if - as your guru from the Daily Mail claims - there has been "no warming for 17 years"

You keep running away from this question. Why?
Can't your guru from the Daily Mail answer it?

I guess this is the problem when you get all of your opinions from journalists and shock jocks, isn't it.

When faced with a simple question based on logic - it all falls apart and makes you look like an idiot.

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

don't run away again. Try to answer this time.

same crap, different day. you are just too stupid to read or understand.

We are still waiting.

You claimed that :
the IPCC cheif said that there had been a 17 year paus in global warming

Still waiting to see the quote. Don't run away CTRL-x/CTRL-V. Show us the quote.

The only reference you have shown us so far says the exact opposite to what you claim. It claimed he said: it would need to last "30 to 40 years at least" to break the long-term global warming trend.

You appear to have been caught red-handed telling lies. Don't you think is about time you owned up to this?

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #192 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:55pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:35pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 7:11pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 6:46pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 2:22pm:

AGW unproven = doomsday cultists are faith based believers.

Can you explain to us why you blindly believe the Daliy Mail columnists silly opinion piece about "no global warming for 17 years"

when:
oceans continue to warm?
sea levels continue to rise?
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease?
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease?
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

Why are these things happening if - as your guru from the Daily Mail claims - there has been "no warming for 17 years"

You keep running away from this question. Why?
Can't your guru from the Daily Mail answer it?

I guess this is the problem when you get all of your opinions from journalists and shock jocks, isn't it.

When faced with a simple question based on logic - it all falls apart and makes you look like an idiot.

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

don't run away again. Try to answer this time.

I dont see where you get this david rose thing from. I refer to math. 0.5 = 0.5 and I have already answered this same question 3 times now and you just ignore it, so stuff u

No you haven't "answered this same question 3 times now". Don't tell lies.

If you had you would link to where you have done this.

But you can't can you. You are just trying to run away again.

Please answer the question:

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

Or if you claim to have "answered this same question 3 times now" - show us an example. Show us you are not telling lies.

oh ffs. For the 4th time. These questions you ask me do not relate to my statement at all. If you have a question that relates to my statement of 0.5 equaling 0.5 and you have some new research that says 0.5 does not in fact equal 0.5, then bring it on. Otherwise, take your cultist BS to someone else.

If you want to learn, look for lag, short wave radiation, black carbon, the sun ect but dont bother with co2, it just doesnt have a large enough impact and dont bother asking me these questions again unless it relates to a statement I make.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #193 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:57pm

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:55pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:35pm:

I dont see where you get this david rose thing from. I refer to math. 0.5 = 0.5 and I have already answered this same question 3 times now and you just ignore it, so stuff u

No you haven't "answered this same question 3 times now". Don't tell lies.

If you had you would link to where you have done this.

But you can't can you. You are just trying to run away again.

Please answer the question:

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

Or if you claim to have "answered this same question 3 times now" - show us an example. Show us you are not telling lies.

oh ffs. For the 4th time. These questions you ask me do not relate to my statement at all. If you have a question that relates to my statement of 0.5 equaling 0.5 and you have some new research that says 0.5 does not in fact equal 0.5, then bring it on. Otherwise, take your cultist BS to someone else.

If you want to learn, look for lag, short wave radiation, black carbon, the sun but dont bother with co2, it just isnt worth bothering with. [/quote]
So no. You have not "answered this same question 3 times now" - have you

That was just a lie - wasn't it.
Come on - answre the question.

You reckon there has been no warming for 17 years

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

stop running away

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Climate Change is back on
Reply #194 - Mar 10^th, 2013 at 9:02pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:55pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2013 at 8:35pm:

No you haven't "answered this same question 3 times now". Don't tell lies.

If you had you would link to where you have done this.

But you can't can you. You are just trying to run away again.

Please answer the question:

Please tell us why:
oceans continue to warm
sea levels continue to rise
the arctic ice cap continues to decrease
global glacial mass balance continues to decrease
every single one of the past 17 years has had an average surface temperature above the long term average.

if there has been "no warming for 17 years"

Or if you claim to have "answered this same question 3 times now" - show us an example. Show us you are not telling lies.

oh ffs. For the 4th time. These questions you ask me do not relate to my statement at all. If you have a question that relates to my statement of 0.5 equaling 0.5 and you have some new research that says 0.5 does not in fact equal 0.5, then bring it on. Otherwise, take your cultist BS to someone else.

If you want to learn, look for lag, short wave radiation, black carbon, the sun but dont bother with co2, it just doesnt have a large enough impact and dont bother asking me these questions again unless it relates to a statement I make. .

So no. You have not "answered this same question 3 times now" - have you

That was just a lie - wasn't it.
Come on - answre the question.

You reckon there has been no warming for 17 years

Please tell us why:

You are a complete f tool arent you.

Back to top

IP Logged