It is a mystery I agree.
Most of it is to do with the A ... they  don't accept that human actions are causing Climate change.

Seems pretty stupid to me. Perhaps it is because they think humans are created by God, and therefore supreme, and saying we are fouling our own nest is an insult, which they take personally.

But lets face it folks, we ARE destroying our only home. Not even animals do that. Only us.

We are obviously not as supreme as some claim.

I certainly don't "deny" AGW.

It might be real, however, there's no reliable, conclusive evidence at the moment that supports the theory.

Is there climate change? Sure.

Do we know exactly what causes it? Absolutely not. Anyone who says otherwise, is lying.

Despite that, if people honestly believe that we can change the climate for the better I'm happy to go along with whatever "solutions" they want to offer.

Renewable energy? Great idea - go for it.

Recycle? No problem - I've always recycled.

Ride a bike or walk, instead of using your car? Again, I do this all the time.

Climate change doesn't concern me in the slightest.

On a list of things that worry me, it wouldn't even make the top 1,000.

If you think you can "save the world", though, knock yourself out. I'm not gonna stand in your way.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 10:19am:

All counts?  Please explain.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 10:19am:

Not in the slightest.

It's merely a theory.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 10:41am:


No, they can see climate change in action.

AGW is just one possible explanation.

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 10:44am:


Nope. We know that GHGs absorb IR photons heading to space.

Sorry Greg, you are just a denier. WHY do you deny AGW?

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:16am:



It's also why there is no consensus.

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:23am:


100% correct.

And I'm not an AGW denier either!

Of course you are not Lisa.

You couldn’t understand the evidence for one.

Gregg is a denier tho.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:35am:


That's the problem, Booby: the AGW cult will not accept alternative theories.

They are completely unscientific and untruthful in their approach, and that's why they have such a bad reputation.

Jovial is a victim of media brainwashing -
he can't think for himself &
even consider an alternative theory.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:41am:


Sad, but true.

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:47am:


The independent investigation of the truth in ANY matter requires us to consider possible alternative theories/explanations.

It's both tragic and bizzare that Monk is unable to fathom this.

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:58am:


Once the AGW bug bites, it seems to destroy the victim's ability to think rationally.

And, let's face it: the AGW cult is exceptionally good at producing propaganda and lies.

This topic is like watching ping pong.

 

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 12:17pm:


Actually....that a very true and honest response.

A lot of us can identify with your sentiments Greg.

Only an irrational dhead would have the audacity to ridicule your post.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 12:42pm:


Nobody has ever said that it isn't well supported.

Let's stick to the science, though, instead of worrying about popularity.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 1:03pm:


Why lie?

Seriously.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 1:03pm:

No, it doesn't.  Not even close.  Why must you lie?

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 1:03pm:

Yes, there is.  Again: why lie?

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2017 at 10:52pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 5:27pm:


And there we have it, people: a perfect example of how AGW cult members are completey closed-minded.

It's a worry.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 5:34pm:


We have a denier here, people.

Come take a look.

For those who missed the denier's question:

"WHAT alternative explanation????"

Dear oh dear.

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 5:36pm:



F.F.S  Heres  me in complete agreement  with GREG

Were that idiot Tim Flannery  still living on the coast 

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 5:27pm:



You mean like Meehle et al 2004? GHG's are anthropogenic. 
Like methane - apparently no natural cause like termites.
Like water vapour - I'm not sure how man makes that. He drinks water, he sweats water - seems natural.
Like CO2 - apparently plants do not emit CO2.

Is that the science you talk about.

Meehle is qoted from one of your favourite websites - Skeptical Science.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 5:53pm:


Please quote the scientific paper that proves natural variability "does not cut it".


You do have the science don't you?

Good, go away then.

You had no explanation at all for the increasing global temperature. You never give any specifics when poo pooing an explanation of AGW theory.

You are a denier and that is that.

WHY you deny AGW is a question we obviously will not get an answer to.

lee wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 5:56pm:


Ask the cult member if climate change existed before humans.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 27^th, 2017 at 10:52pm:



The A in AGW (human causation) is not established. Climate change correlates with a whole load of things besides CO2. None of it is ever considered by the activists because none of the other possible causes have the political dimension of 'human causation'.

Not only that, the reasoning that attributes GW to human is very speculative and is based on mostly models that have the very assumption of human causation (human Co2) built into them.

Also, the AGW activists are so vehement and fascists about it that it makes the whole thing as suspicious as Hillary, Safe Schools, gender studies, etc. It's an overwhelmingly political agitation, rather than a scientific one because the politics controls wealth, power, etc.

I am only slightly facetious when I say that neo-Marxism causes AGW.

Frank wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 6:25pm:


Good post.  Excellent, in fact.

Our resident denier of alternative explanations, and life-time cult member, won't have any of it though.

He'll stick his fingers in his ears and call you a denier.

See?  I told you!

Frank wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 6:25pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:58am:



Hi Lisa,
Jovial says he has a BSc but I doubt it -
as he doesn't know the difference between
a scientific law & a scientific theory.

AGW is a theory.
Mini Ice Age prediction is a theory.

They both have quite a bit of strong evidence.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 7:15pm:


Jovial doesn't understand what 'evidence' is, though.

Mini Ice Age prediction is a theory.


Nope, the world is warming not cooling.


No evidence has been produced to support the LIA nonsense.

A fox “flash frozen” after falling through thin ice??? The Danube is made of liquid nitrogen?

A lake in Melbourne turns pinks and that is evidence of a LIA? ahahahahahahaha how fricking STUPID!

Sheer nonsense.

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 7:19pm:


Yes Greg, you're right.

His last post proves that.

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 7:19pm:



David DuByne is only a messenger -
he relies upon the global cooling theories of many scientists.



30 Top Scientists Predict Global Cooling 2015-2050

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 6:41pm:




The extra CO2 in the atmosphere from human activity is NOT proof of AGW.

Nobody fully understand how the climate works. People latch on the identifiable aspects of human activity and latch onto that. It allows them to pretend they fully understand as well as thereby letting them off the hook about the vast aspects of the climate they do not understand.

One example - and I do not mean it as a trump card - is under-water volcanos. Nobody know where they all are, nobody knows how active they are, nobody knows how much CO2 they emit into the oceans.

Years ago we used to hear about the 'forcing' of atmospheric CO2: a little extra CO2 (caused by humans) was 'forcing' all the other atmospheric greenhouse gases to elevate their evil influence. This theory coincided with the sloshing of the Lord of the Rings trilogy in the public conscience - one ring to rule them all, one anthropogenic trace gas to rule them all. 

Ridiculous is the only word.

I am not arguing against clean air, water, I am not against renewable energy in principle. But the AGW scare is just not credible. Energy black-out and people not having cheap and reliable energy because of this stupid scare is criminal.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 7:35pm:



The mechanism of AGW is not known.

That is our point of contention.  I do not know how it works - nor do you. Nor anyone.

That is the point. It is a hope, not a fact by people like you.

Frank wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 7:37pm:


Correct.

It's proof that there's extra CO2 in the atmosphere from human activity.

Nothing more.

Cult members don't understand this.

When that CO2 is shown to be absorbing photons of IR that were heading for space then we have good evidence for the AGW theory. Spectrometry both terrestrial and satellite does show the GHGs absorbing IR.

So the AGW theory holds up very well.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 7:39pm:



If we knew for sure that the only cause of GW was that extra CO2 absorbing IR, yes.

But we don't Nobody does. It is a conjecture made in ignorance of very other conjecture that can be made.


Nobody understand how the climate works.
Therefore nobody can make definitive pronouncements about what makes it go this way or that.

It is an irreproducable, un-replicatable system so you cannot experiment. It is all modeling, guesses and conjectures with a massive dose of political push.

Being for or against AGW is largely a political stance, not an objective, scientific one - simply because there is no apolitical, scientific understanding that can say either way.

AGW is politics, not science.

Frank wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 8:55pm:


As I said before, proof that GHGs cause AGW does not rely on models, just chemistry and spectroscopy.

Yes, I have a good idea.

Frank wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 8:55pm:


OK, Sore End, here is the uhhhhh “politics” of AGW 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v410/n6826/abs/410355a0.html

Bobby. wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 11:41am:


I just love this statement by Booby!

Media brainwashing. Yeah, I always quote ACA etc as evidence of AGW  Nah, I quote scientific papers, papers that go right over Booby’s pointy head 

I can’t think for myself, oh boy that is a beauty! Booby can never refute a single critique I make of the ridiculous Dubyne videos he keeps posting here tho nobody views them. The flash frozen fox—no answer when I point out that a river with a very thin layer of ice, that the fox broke through, cannot be cold enough to flash freeze a mosquito let alone a fox! No answer at all. (If the ice was really thick and the river really really cold the fox would not have broken through the ice!) But I can’t think for myself 

There are no credible alternative theories that explain why the globe is heating up.

Not orbital changes. Not the sun being more active—it has been quiescent for like 50 years! So WHAT can be heating the globe? Is there more radioactive fission in the earths mantle? Nope, AGW, radiative forcings, is the only possible theory to explain the warming of the globe.

Ask yourself this: since the AGW theory is likely the explanation for the heating of the globe even with a quiescent sun—what is going to happen when the sun enters, as it will at some stage, its active state?

Also, what Booby can’t bring himself to evaluate and answer: with 40% more CO2 in the atmosphere than at the last LIA—what will a new LIA look like? Come on Booby, you seem to claim, by trying to bag me, that you can think for yourself. So, what will a new LIA, if one miraculously appeared, look like? Would we even notice it apart from readings on instruments?

And Dubyne L I E S, he lies a LOT! He claimed record cold and snow in Europe in April. I checked weather records and agricultural sites. There was no such record cold and snow! A clear lie, just like the “flash frozen” fox, just like the pink lake. Complete crap.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 28^th, 2017 at 10:34pm:



Your link just takes me to https://www.nature.com/

What's the title of your article?

Try this:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v410/n6826/abs/410355a0.html

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 29^th, 2017 at 10:08am:


Stop being a tool.

The only thing the "deniers" as you have labelled them deny is that

MANS EMISSIONS ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LATEST WARMING CYCLE ON EARTH.

That's what the "deniers" as you have labelled them deny.

Water vapor and the GHGs block IR from leaving the atmosphere. Why do you deny AGW, Ajax?