Australian Politics Forum - Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #15 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:15am

ministerforbananas wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:11am:

I believe in Climate change but i dont believe in the Alarmism the greenies and IPCC indulge in. Yes Climate change is a problem, yes CO2 is a greenhouse gas that contributes to warming but its clear that its not as significant of a factor as they said it was. And the Human factor is also highly debatable, the percentage of CO2 is so small that its insignificant compared to other green house gases.

For example, when it was getting hot they all said its Global warming! Then it started getting cold they said "Well part of Global Warming is that Winters get colder and SUmmers get hotter" but then we started having Summers that are Colder and Winters that are Warmer, then they said "Its Extreme Climate change" with no clear definition of "extreme"

And now we have record winters and freezing in the Northern hemisphere but they can't explain it, they just go back to their open ended two words "Climate Change"

on top of that, now every hurricane, cyclone, earthquake, etc is being blamed on Climate Change / Global warming even though the top IPCC scientist said that its "impossible" to prove if a certain extreme weather even is related to Warming.

Latest predictions span 100-500 years, that way we can never criticize them as you can never prove if they are wrong unless you wait 100 years.

The Media loves doom and gloom so they will pump this forever.

What if you're wrong?

Shocked

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

ministerforbananas

New Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 8

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #16 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:23pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:15am:

ministerforbananas wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:11am:

I believe in Climate change but i dont believe in the Alarmism the greenies and IPCC indulge in. Yes Climate change is a problem, yes CO2 is a greenhouse gas that contributes to warming but its clear that its not as significant of a factor as they said it was. And the Human factor is also highly debatable, the percentage of CO2 is so small that its insignificant compared to other green house gases.

For example, when it was getting hot they all said its Global warming! Then it started getting cold they said "Well part of Global Warming is that Winters get colder and SUmmers get hotter" but then we started having Summers that are Colder and Winters that are Warmer, then they said "Its Extreme Climate change" with no clear definition of "extreme"

And now we have record winters and freezing in the Northern hemisphere but they can't explain it, they just go back to their open ended two words "Climate Change"

on top of that, now every hurricane, cyclone, earthquake, etc is being blamed on Climate Change / Global warming even though the top IPCC scientist said that its "impossible" to prove if a certain extreme weather even is related to Warming.

Latest predictions span 100-500 years, that way we can never criticize them as you can never prove if they are wrong unless you wait 100 years.

The Media loves doom and gloom so they will pump this forever.

What if you're wrong?

Shocked

If i'm wrong, nothing can't be solved through technology and mass energy solutions like Nuclear or even Nuclear Fusion which should be viable in the next 50 years +. One thing for certain is through tecnology Humanity is able to eventually solve and overcomes all problems.

Its better for humanity to adapt to Climate Change (in the scenario that we witness rapid acceleration of warming across the globe)

It far beats having to roll back civilization back to the stone ages just for the sake of making a few loud Greenies happy.

If only Greenies would adopt Nuclear, this whole debate would be over and both sides of the argument will be satisfied.

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #17 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 2:08pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:10am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 10:11am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 9:37am:

have you found any articles or identified a scientific theory which shows that the average Global temperature will decrease as CO2 levels increase in the earths atmosphere?

What about global surface temperature being independent of atmospheric CO2 concentration? Any luck on that front,.

There seems to be a lot of scientific evidence and theoretical support that the earth will warm as CO2 concentration increases in the earths atmosphere.

And if the earth warms up, there will be changes to the earths climate and every other ecological and biological system.

The crap that you spew out seems to be aired on the internet only. Funny that isnt it. Why not put together a article and submit through the scientific peer reviiew process?

Oh whats wrong, cant you handle genuine scrutiny?

You need to hide in the dungeons of the internet to vomit out the BS

At least one part of your post is true...
The Earth warming will indeed be changes to the climate and ecological and biological systems. And if Co2 increases as a result of that warming, then plant life will increase in abundance and health (since Co2 is, after all, plant food).

But I notice you still haven't managed to provide any empirical or real world evidence that Co2 is a cause of warming..

The article in the wattsup link, IS from a peer reviewed journal, and was written by scientists..

Oh, and pot-kettle Grin

indulis at 12:00 PM on 16 July, 2010
Agriculture negatives- More CO2 produces lower protein levels in the plants, so a larger quantity is needed to provide the same amount of protein.
"Despite the large body of research on the effect of elevated CO2 on primary productivity, few studies consider the overall nutritional value of plants."

More CO2 also produces more cyanide in the plant, while at the same time lowering protein in the plant. Animal and human tolerance to cyanide is reduced by lower levels of protein. Coupled with reduced protein levels per plant, this makes plants more toxic.

Paper "Changes in Nutritional Value of Cyanogenic Trifolium repens
Grown at Elevated Atmospheric CO2"
Overview of this research from Monash University
Audio and transcript from ABC Science Show interview with Roslyn M. Gleadow

source: comment 30, http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?p=1&t=364&&a=50

NB: there is plenty of other commentary regarding the fact CO2 is not the only limiting factor in plant growth... how does extra CO2 supply more nutrients and water for one? For two, why should all plants react in a positive manner to extra CO2 which of course some do...!??!

Gizmo needs a reality check Cheesy

So a random comment from a (probably unqualified) poster is suddenly relevant??

Isn't that what you claim Anthony Watts is??

(edit) skeptical science??...isn't that the site run by John Cook, the 'scientist' who lost a global warming debate to Lord Monckton???

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 12^th, 2015 at 6:42pm by gizmo_2655 »

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #18 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 2:09pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:01am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 7:19pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 4:39pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 3:04pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:57pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

"DeSmogBlog is a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man, James Hoggan and funded by a convicted money launderer, John Lefebvre. The irony here is their favorite tactic is to attempt to smear those they disagree with as funded by “dirty money”. Since it’s creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dares oppose an alarmist position on global warming. "

That would appear to be a direct quote, "..but from whom?", the whole forum asks in unison

You don't know how to do a google word search??

Just admit you're sly and the forum will give a collective wry grin at your forced humility Grin

Ok, since you can't find it..
http://sppiblog.org/news/the-truth-about-desmogblog-and-sourchwatch

"Their articles frequently reference unreliable sources such as Wikipedia.."(Did you conveniently forget to include this part from the same opeing paragraph!??!)

It's a fact wikipedia is used by professionals!

It's also a fact that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, with no review system

.

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #19 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 4:28pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 2:08pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:10am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 10:11am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 9:37am:

have you found any articles or identified a scientific theory which shows that the average Global temperature will decrease as CO2 levels increase in the earths atmosphere?

What about global surface temperature being independent of atmospheric CO2 concentration? Any luck on that front,.

There seems to be a lot of scientific evidence and theoretical support that the earth will warm as CO2 concentration increases in the earths atmosphere.

And if the earth warms up, there will be changes to the earths climate and every other ecological and biological system.

The crap that you spew out seems to be aired on the internet only. Funny that isnt it. Why not put together a article and submit through the scientific peer reviiew process?

Oh whats wrong, cant you handle genuine scrutiny?

You need to hide in the dungeons of the internet to vomit out the BS

At least one part of your post is true...
The Earth warming will indeed be changes to the climate and ecological and biological systems. And if Co2 increases as a result of that warming, then plant life will increase in abundance and health (since Co2 is, after all, plant food).

But I notice you still haven't managed to provide any empirical or real world evidence that Co2 is a cause of warming..

The article in the wattsup link, IS from a peer reviewed journal, and was written by scientists..

Oh, and pot-kettle Grin

indulis at 12:00 PM on 16 July, 2010
Agriculture negatives- More CO2 produces lower protein levels in the plants, so a larger quantity is needed to provide the same amount of protein.
"Despite the large body of research on the effect of elevated CO2 on primary productivity, few studies consider the overall nutritional value of plants."

More CO2 also produces more cyanide in the plant, while at the same time lowering protein in the plant. Animal and human tolerance to cyanide is reduced by lower levels of protein. Coupled with reduced protein levels per plant, this makes plants more toxic.

Paper "Changes in Nutritional Value of Cyanogenic Trifolium repens
Grown at Elevated Atmospheric CO2"
Overview of this research from Monash University
Audio and transcript from ABC Science Show interview with Roslyn M. Gleadow

source: comment 30, http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?p=1&t=364&&a=50

NB: there is plenty of other commentary regarding the fact CO2 is not the only limiting factor in plant growth... how does extra CO2 supply more nutrients and water for one? For two, why should all plants react in a positive manner to extra CO2 which of course some do...!??!

Gizmo needs a reality check Cheesy

So a random comment from a (probably unqualified) poster is suddenly relevant??

Isn't that what you claim Anthony Watts is??

Don't believe it see if I care! You're losing credibility not me Wink

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #20 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 4:35pm

ministerforbananas wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:23pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:15am:

ministerforbananas wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:11am:

I believe in Climate change but i dont believe in the Alarmism the greenies and IPCC indulge in. Yes Climate change is a problem, yes CO2 is a greenhouse gas that contributes to warming but its clear that its not as significant of a factor as they said it was. And the Human factor is also highly debatable, the percentage of CO2 is so small that its insignificant compared to other green house gases.

For example, when it was getting hot they all said its Global warming! Then it started getting cold they said "Well part of Global Warming is that Winters get colder and SUmmers get hotter" but then we started having Summers that are Colder and Winters that are Warmer, then they said "Its Extreme Climate change" with no clear definition of "extreme"

And now we have record winters and freezing in the Northern hemisphere but they can't explain it, they just go back to their open ended two words "Climate Change"

on top of that, now every hurricane, cyclone, earthquake, etc is being blamed on Climate Change / Global warming even though the top IPCC scientist said that its "impossible" to prove if a certain extreme weather even is related to Warming.

Latest predictions span 100-500 years, that way we can never criticize them as you can never prove if they are wrong unless you wait 100 years.

The Media loves doom and gloom so they will pump this forever.

What if you're wrong?

Shocked

If i'm wrong, nothing can't be solved through technology and mass energy solutions like Nuclear or even Nuclear Fusion which should be viable in the next 50 years +. One thing for certain is through tecnology Humanity is able to eventually solve and overcomes all problems.

Its better for humanity to adapt to Climate Change (in the scenario that we witness rapid acceleration of warming across the globe)

It far beats having to roll back civilization back to the stone ages just for the sake of making a few loud Greenies happy.

If only Greenies would adopt Nuclear, this whole debate would be over and both sides of the argument will be satisfied.

Do you write science fiction?

Do you smoke crack and pretend you're a futurist hoping daddy won't bust you for coming round for prawns and crayfish with those glassy eyes again?!!?

You're talking about technological solutions to technological problems when simple logic says STOP DIGGING THE HOLE!

Do you know what entropy and disintegration of system is? yeh, buddy: I wish I voted Liberal and pretended I had business acumen like you Grin

You're one smart bunny Roll Eyes

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #21 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 4:39pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 2:09pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:01am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 7:19pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 4:39pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 3:04pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:57pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

"DeSmogBlog is a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man, James Hoggan and funded by a convicted money launderer, John Lefebvre. The irony here is their favorite tactic is to attempt to smear those they disagree with as funded by “dirty money”. Since it’s creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dares oppose an alarmist position on global warming. "

That would appear to be a direct quote, "..but from whom?", the whole forum asks in unison

You don't know how to do a google word search??

Just admit you're sly and the forum will give a collective wry grin at your forced humility Grin

Ok, since you can't find it..
http://sppiblog.org/news/the-truth-about-desmogblog-and-sourchwatch

"Their articles frequently reference unreliable sources such as Wikipedia.."(Did you conveniently forget to include this part from the same opeing paragraph!??!)

It's a fact wikipedia is used by professionals!

It's also a fact that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, with no review system

.

Gizmo can't admit professionals use wikipedia and we all laugh at him yet again!

You love getting laughed at don't you Gizmo Cheesy

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #22 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 5:39pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 4:39pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 2:09pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:01am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 7:19pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 4:39pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 3:04pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:57pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

"DeSmogBlog is a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man, James Hoggan and funded by a convicted money launderer, John Lefebvre. The irony here is their favorite tactic is to attempt to smear those they disagree with as funded by “dirty money”. Since it’s creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dares oppose an alarmist position on global warming. "

That would appear to be a direct quote, "..but from whom?", the whole forum asks in unison

You don't know how to do a google word search??

Just admit you're sly and the forum will give a collective wry grin at your forced humility Grin

Ok, since you can't find it..
http://sppiblog.org/news/the-truth-about-desmogblog-and-sourchwatch

"Their articles frequently reference unreliable sources such as Wikipedia.."(Did you conveniently forget to include this part from the same opeing paragraph!??!)

It's a fact wikipedia is used by professionals!

It's also a fact that Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, with no review system

.

Gizmo can't admit professionals use wikipedia and we all laugh at him yet again!

You love getting laughed at don't you Gizmo Cheesy

Which professionals use it??

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #23 - Mar 12^th, 2015 at 10:05pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:15am:

ministerforbananas wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:11am:

I believe in Climate change but i dont believe in the Alarmism the greenies and IPCC indulge in. Yes Climate change is a problem, yes CO2 is a greenhouse gas that contributes to warming but its clear that its not as significant of a factor as they said it was. And the Human factor is also highly debatable, the percentage of CO2 is so small that its insignificant compared to other green house gases.

For example, when it was getting hot they all said its Global warming! Then it started getting cold they said "Well part of Global Warming is that Winters get colder and SUmmers get hotter" but then we started having Summers that are Colder and Winters that are Warmer, then they said "Its Extreme Climate change" with no clear definition of "extreme"

And now we have record winters and freezing in the Northern hemisphere but they can't explain it, they just go back to their open ended two words "Climate Change"

on top of that, now every hurricane, cyclone, earthquake, etc is being blamed on Climate Change / Global warming even though the top IPCC scientist said that its "impossible" to prove if a certain extreme weather even is related to Warming.

Latest predictions span 100-500 years, that way we can never criticize them as you can never prove if they are wrong unless you wait 100 years.

The Media loves doom and gloom so they will pump this forever.

What if you're wrong?

Shocked

Going by the models and going by the poor science of AGW climate change..... We will not be wrong. Only the models to which this whole pseudo science relies on are wrong.

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #24 - Mar 13^th, 2015 at 3:10am

ministerforbananas wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 1:23pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:15am:

ministerforbananas wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:11am:

I believe in Climate change but i dont believe in the Alarmism the greenies and IPCC indulge in. Yes Climate change is a problem, yes CO2 is a greenhouse gas that contributes to warming but its clear that its not as significant of a factor as they said it was. And the Human factor is also highly debatable, the percentage of CO2 is so small that its insignificant compared to other green house gases.

For example, when it was getting hot they all said its Global warming! Then it started getting cold they said "Well part of Global Warming is that Winters get colder and SUmmers get hotter" but then we started having Summers that are Colder and Winters that are Warmer, then they said "Its Extreme Climate change" with no clear definition of "extreme"

And now we have record winters and freezing in the Northern hemisphere but they can't explain it, they just go back to their open ended two words "Climate Change"

on top of that, now every hurricane, cyclone, earthquake, etc is being blamed on Climate Change / Global warming even though the top IPCC scientist said that its "impossible" to prove if a certain extreme weather even is related to Warming.

Latest predictions span 100-500 years, that way we can never criticize them as you can never prove if they are wrong unless you wait 100 years.

The Media loves doom and gloom so they will pump this forever.

What if you're wrong?

Shocked

If i'm wrong, nothing can't be solved through technology and mass energy solutions like Nuclear or even Nuclear Fusion which should be viable in the next 50 years +.

How is Fukushima and Chernobyl going?

You want Australia to follow this path towards insanity and madness?

Your hatred of children and future generations is showing

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #25 - Mar 13^th, 2015 at 8:13am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 3:04pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:57pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

"DeSmogBlog is a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man, James Hoggan and funded by a convicted money launderer, John Lefebvre. The irony here is their favorite tactic is to attempt to smear those they disagree with as funded by “dirty money”. Since it’s creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dares oppose an alarmist position on global warming. "

That would appear to be a direct quote, "..but from whom?", the whole forum asks in unison

You don't know how to do a google word search??

I did a google word search and found plenty of that specific quote being regurgitated, you know, like it's fact.

Yet, the clear question above was "WHOM?"....

It may have escaped your notice but no actual author is credited with the quote.... Not a lot of credibility points there. Ironically, when the quote directly attacks the credibility of its subject.

So, after checking quite a few links, it appears no author is putting their hand up for the actual statement?

What is this about junk science again?

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #26 - Mar 13^th, 2015 at 9:22am

Phemanderac wrote on Mar 13^th, 2015 at 8:13am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 3:04pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:57pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

"DeSmogBlog is a smear site founded by a scientifically unqualified public relations man, James Hoggan and funded by a convicted money launderer, John Lefebvre. The irony here is their favorite tactic is to attempt to smear those they disagree with as funded by “dirty money”. Since it’s creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dares oppose an alarmist position on global warming. "

That would appear to be a direct quote, "..but from whom?", the whole forum asks in unison

You don't know how to do a google word search??

I did a google word search and found plenty of that specific quote being regurgitated, you know, like it's fact.

Yet, the clear question above was "WHOM?"....

It may have escaped your notice but no actual author is credited with the quote.... Not a lot of credibility points there. Ironically, when the quote directly attacks the credibility of its subject.

So, after checking quite a few links, it appears no author is putting their hand up for the actual statement?

What is this about junk science again?

Did you click on the link I posted?

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #27 - Mar 14^th, 2015 at 9:24pm

I see no fess up. Hardly surprising.

Just to go with the theme of this thread and the bogus AGW models. Here we can see and be happy that the deep oceans have actually cooled at the time of the pseudo scientists of AGW catastrophic climate change were sprooking deep oceans were taking up the missing heat.

No you dumb azz's. The heat is not missing, it just isn't anywhere.

Quote:

Abstract

Estimated values of recent oceanic heat uptake are of order of a few tenths of a W/m2, and are a very small residual of air-sea exchanges with annual average regional magnitudes of hundreds of W/m2. Using a dynamically consistent state estimate, the redistribution of heat within the ocean is calculated over a 20-year period. The 20-year mean vertical heat flux shows strong variations in both the lateral and vertical directions, consistent with the ocean being a dynamically active and spatially complex heat exchanger. Between mixing and advection, the two processes determining the vertical heat transport in the deep ocean, advection plays a more important role in setting the spatial patterns of vertical heat exchange and its temporal variations. The global integral of vertical heat flux shows an upward heat transport in the deep ocean, suggesting a cooling trend in the deep ocean
. These results support an inference that the near-surface thermal properties of the ocean are a consequence, at least in part, of internal redistributions of heat, some of which must reflect water that has undergone long trajectories since last exposure to the atmosphere. The small residual heat exchange with the atmosphere today is unlikely to represent the interaction with an ocean that was in thermal equilibrium at the start of global warming. An analogy is drawn with carbon-14 “reservoir ages” which range over hundreds to a thousand years.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00550.1?af=R&

Back to top

IP Logged

St George of the Garden

Gold Member

Offline

http://tinyurl.com/n
3o8m2x

Posts: 9809
Gender: male

Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc
Reply #28 - Mar 24^th, 2015 at 11:18pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 11:10am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 10:11am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Mar 12^th, 2015 at 9:37am:

have you found any articles or identified a scientific theory which shows that the average Global temperature will decrease as CO2 levels increase in the earths atmosphere?

What about global surface temperature being independent of atmospheric CO2 concentration? Any luck on that front,.

There seems to be a lot of scientific evidence and theoretical support that the earth will warm as CO2 concentration increases in the earths atmosphere.

And if the earth warms up, there will be changes to the earths climate and every other ecological and biological system.

The crap that you spew out seems to be aired on the internet only. Funny that isnt it. Why not put together a article and submit through the scientific peer reviiew process?

Oh whats wrong, cant you handle genuine scrutiny?

You need to hide in the dungeons of the internet to vomit out the BS

At least one part of your post is true...
The Earth warming will indeed be changes to the climate and ecological and biological systems. And if Co2 increases as a result of that warming, then plant life will increase in abundance and health (since Co2 is, after all, plant food).

But I notice you still haven't managed to provide any empirical or real world evidence that Co2 is a cause of warming..

The article in the wattsup link, IS from a peer reviewed journal, and was written by scientists..

Oh, and pot-kettle Grin

indulis at 12:00 PM on 16 July, 2010
Agriculture negatives- More CO2 produces lower protein levels in the plants, so a larger quantity is needed to provide the same amount of protein.
"Despite the large body of research on the effect of elevated CO2 on primary productivity, few studies consider the overall nutritional value of plants."

More CO2 also produces more cyanide in the plant, while at the same time lowering protein in the plant. Animal and human tolerance to cyanide is reduced by lower levels of protein. Coupled with reduced protein levels per plant, this makes plants more toxic.

Paper "Changes in Nutritional Value of Cyanogenic Trifolium repens
Grown at Elevated Atmospheric CO2"
Overview of this research from Monash University
Audio and transcript from ABC Science Show interview with Roslyn M. Gleadow

source: comment 30, http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?p=1&t=364&&a=50

NB: there is plenty of other commentary regarding the fact CO2 is not the only limiting factor in plant growth... how does extra CO2 supply more nutrients and water for one? For two, why should all plants react in a positive manner to extra CO2 which of course some do...!??!

Gizmo needs a reality check Cheesy

As nights warm—minimum temperatures rise–plants can’t take up as much CO2. The “plant food” non–argument is total crap.

Back to top

I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso!

Friends of the National Broadband Network

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded Gold Member Offline MediocrityNET: because people died for this! Posts: 26966	Re: Im calling it. Fess up already . No more pseudo sc Reply #29 - Mar 24^th, 2015 at 11:37pm http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/fig2-...
Back to top	Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) IP Logged