Why no news about Climetgate ?

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Here is something to back up what I have been saying about Canada omitting temperatures that conflict with the scaremongering and what my father witnessed:

It was March 28, 1945. Headlines proclaimed Hitler’s defeat speech was days away and Stalin’s tanks were inside Austria. In Toronto, the heat peaked at 25.6C, the hottest March day on the books at Pearson since record-keeping began in 1937. The following year, on the same day, the record was matched. On Thursday, Toronto came within a fraction with a daytime high of 25.5.

Toronto heat wave comes close to hottest March day on record

I heard a climate expert who was not bitten by the propaganda bug and still had the fortitude to state the truth and take the heat.. He stated that the hottest time was in the 30's and 40's when CO2 was not an issue. The records we break today will be from those decades.
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,200
3,821
45
✟917,256.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Here is something to back up what I have been saying about Canada omitting temperatures that conflict with the scaremongering and what my father witnessed:

It was March 28, 1945. Headlines proclaimed Hitler’s defeat speech was days away and Stalin’s tanks were inside Austria. In Toronto, the heat peaked at 25.6C, the hottest March day on the books at Pearson since record-keeping began in 1937. The following year, on the same day, the record was matched. On Thursday, Toronto came within a fraction with a daytime high of 25.5.

Toronto heat wave comes close to hottest March day on record

I heard a climate expert who was not bitten by the propaganda bug and still had the fortitude to state the truth and take the heat.. He stated that the hottest time was in the 30's and 40's when CO2 was not an issue. The records we break today will be from those decades.
Local temperatures.... global temperatures...

It's a significant difference that has been pointed out many, many times on these boards.

(Maybe we should check the satellite footage of Toronto on those days. ;) )
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Local temperatures.... global temperatures...

It's a significant difference that has been pointed out many, many times on these boards.

(Maybe we should check the satellite footage of Toronto on those days. ;) )
Nice try but that was a global event. It is known as the "Dust bowl" days... ;)

Satellite pictures from the 30's?
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Are we going to be foolish here? Seriously?

Do you have a personal relationship or friendship with any of the scientists that promote the fake "Man made climate change" hoax..

Come on now.. That is of no merit.

No, I do not have personal relationships with any scientists who are involved in climate research. But I never claimed I did. You, however, clearly claimed that you talk to "More and more people" regarding climate change who think it is fake, and that "One was the founder of the Weather Network."

This is so typical..."Who cares what someone says" especially if they state that the "man made" climate change is fabricated. Just believe all the others who promote it.

This is "selective" belief. Just because they don't have the letters after their name that "you" require.. does not make what they say any less truthful.

Yeah, what kind of fool wants someone to be an actual EXPERT on the subject they are talking about before believing them?

I certainly don't! That's why I go to my dentist for help when my car has trouble, and when I have medical problems, I call my plumber!

So, just keep pounding away at your dislike for anything John Coleman says.

I show you why the man has zero credibility regarding this topic, and you try to pass it off as me making ad hominems because you think I don't like the guy and I'm just trying to muddy his name? Please.

Truth... is not a democracy... 1,000,000 people can swear that one thing is truth... and all be wrong..

Just because many say something does not make it true.

Science is not a democracy either. The facts speak for themselves.

My government in Canada presented a report and they deleted data from 1850 to 1949 in order to make their model say what they wanted or needed it to say... That's what hoaxers do.

GOLDSTEIN: Feds scrapped 100 years of data on climate change

And again with the conspiracies. The data was inaccurate. Do you think they should use inaccurate data?


Don't get your science information from conspiracy websites, okay? Get it from scientists, because they actually understand it.

Maybe you'll listen to this person. If you don't have the patience to research truth.. just go to the 8:50 mark and listen for a bit.

The problem is not that the world is warming, the problem is that human activity is warming it faster than life can adapt to it. You think scientists are under the impression that the world has always had the climate we are familiar with? Please.

One person that I did have a great personal relationship with was my Dad. A strong Christian. Born in 1929 and died just this January from cancer. A very intelligent man with a sharp mind to the end.

In his words, this warming is not even close to the heat of the 1930's and 40's.

Anecdote is not evidence.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
No, I do not have personal relationships with any scientists who are involved in climate research. But I never claimed I did. You, however, clearly claimed that you talk to "More and more people" regarding climate change who think it is fake, and that "One was the founder of the Weather Network."

Yes, I have talked to many people, educated people, that are of the belief that the "man made" part of this is a hoax cooked up to make money for the rich.
Also, many of these people are Christians and believe that the climate and weather is under full control of God our creator and the creator of this world. It is not something that man is going to alter.

Looking back at our conversation I an see how you may have understood me to claim to know the founder of the weather network. However, I did not mean for it to sound that way.



Yeah, what kind of fool wants someone to be an actual EXPERT on the subject they are talking about before believing them?

There are experts out there that disagree. There are also those who are experts that play the game in order to keep their cash flow, their grants and funding flowing.. Make one claim against the "man made" idea and your funds vanish and your accreditation and lifestyle with it.

I work with engineers, educated people and I will tell you this.. I will take 30 years of experience in any field over someone who has nothing to go on but follow some text book.

Other people can be far more credible in the concerns of science based on their life of real time, real situation and real events.. Than something churned out by academia.

I certainly don't! That's why I go to my dentist for help when my car has trouble, and when I have medical problems, I call my plumber!

That is an absurd comparison... How about taking your car to a corrupt mechanic that sees you coming? You pay him to change your oil and he claims that you need a $500.00 brake job and fuel filter? Where as your neighborhood mechanic, who actually has your best interest in mind, refutes the money grab, tells you that your brakes are good for another 6 months and the fuel filter only gets changed after 100,000 km....



I show you why the man has zero credibility regarding this topic, and you try to pass it off as me making ad hominems because you think I don't like the guy and I'm just trying to muddy his name? Please.

So, you know more than he does? You know who to trust and who to dismiss? How?

I'll tell you how.. by the words of others.. This is how it works. If someone speaks out against Al Gore and his minions... they discredit and ridicule them...



Science is not a democracy either. The facts speak for themselves.
Then why do I always hear people state, as you did, the vast number of people who support the "man made" climate change hoax.... as an actual piece of credible evidence?
I show you an example of how a government, in Canada, that removed, voided, omitted an entire century of data from their numbers.... a century of data that contradicts their agenda... and you are still blind to the corruption and farce of the "man made" ideal.



And again with the conspiracies. The data was inaccurate. Do you think they should use inaccurate data?

What data was inaccurate? It's 100 years of data.... Which included the 1930's and 40's where there was a 20 or 30 year stretch of increased temperatures over an entire continent. And they decided not to include it? That is not how real science works.



Don't get your science information from conspiracy websites, okay? Get it from scientists, because they actually understand it.

You seem to be pretty selective as to where you get your data. There are credible people, websites and media that go against the "man made" climate hoax... You refuse to accept it.




The problem is not that the world is warming, the problem is that human activity is warming it faster than life can adapt to it. You think scientists are under the impression that the world has always had the climate we are familiar with? Please.

Well, not as fast as they have claimed... Sheesh.. take a look at what they have predicted in the past and what has not come to happen...

The whole "pause" is not a "pause" it's because we are entering a "solar minimum". The whole thing is cyclic..

Also, if you think we cannot survive... and adapt to changes.. you haven't studied history.



Anecdote is not evidence.

Yes, whatever you do don't listen to those that have lived it and can speak against the lies presented by those trying to achieve their agenda.

I get it.. It's much easier to cover your ears and chant "lalalalalalala I can't hear you" when people give you evidence of false agenda...

But, of course, I wouldn't want to give the idea that governments, and big business and higher elite powerful people would lie to you to get your money... Never happens does it?

No worries... Time will reveal this truth.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
How do climate scientists get their temperature data? How can they know the earth is warmer now by a mere couple of degrees?
There are two basic methods...

1/ Land based stations
2/Satellite based stations

Both camps continually argue as to who has the most accurate.

Satellite stations are very far away, cannot be regularly calibrated and cannot read to the tight tolerances necessary

Land based stations, put out by NOAA, the "National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration" has land based weather stations in parking lots, beside air conditioner units and other places that totally deem them to be invalid stations.

figure2_tucson_ushcn_from_above.jpg


clip_image004_thumb1.png


NOAA-weather-station-death-valley_Furnace-Creek.jpg


Marysville-issues1.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Need answers

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,421
721
Ohio
✟19,636.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
There are two basic methods...

1/ Land based stations
2/Satellite based stations

Both camps continually argue as to who has the most accurate.

Satellite stations are very far away, cannot be regularly calibrated and cannot read to the tight tolerances necessary

Land based stations, put out by NOAA, the "National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration" has land based weather stations in parking lots, beside air conditioner units and other places that totally deem them to be invalid stations.

figure2_tucson_ushcn_from_above.jpg


clip_image004_thumb1.png


NOAA-weather-station-death-valley_Furnace-Creek.jpg


Marysville-issues1.jpg
Im having a hard time seeing how they can know that the planet is a mere 2 degrees warmer than it was 80 or 100 years ago. The temperature changes daily over the planet. so how can they pinpoint a few degrees in temperature rise over the whole planet?
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Im having a hard time seeing how they can know that the planet is a mere 2 degrees warmer than it was 80 or 100 years ago. The temperature changes daily over the planet. so how can they pinpoint a few degrees in temperature rise over the whole planet?
Well, that's just it... isn't it?

The accurate data... that's "accurate" data does not go back very many years... It's a limited data base and much of it is speculation and inaccurate temperature readings.

As one of my teachers once told me... any statistician worth their diploma... can make data say whatever they want it to say.

Top it off with the statement "weather isn't climate".. and you have a slam dunk
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Need answers
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,200
3,821
45
✟917,256.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Well, that's just it... isn't it?

The accurate data... that's "accurate" data does not go back very many years... It's a limited data base and much of it is speculation and inaccurate temperature readings.

As one of my teachers once told me... any statistician worth their diploma... can make data say whatever they want it to say.

Top it off with the statement "weather isn't climate".. and you have a slam dunk
It's interesting that conspiracy theorists and denialists suddenly claim all evidence is suspect and nothing can be known when people point out that the evidence is against them.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Yes, I have talked to many people, educated people, that are of the belief that the "man made" part of this is a hoax cooked up to make money for the rich.

So what? Lots of educated people are utterly stupid outside their area of skill. Dr Oz is a skilled heart surgeon, yet he promotes absolute quackery on his show. I don't care what the educated people you've talked to say. The only ones who know what they're talking about are the climate scientists.

Also, many of these people are Christians and believe that the climate and weather is under full control of God our creator and the creator of this world. It is not something that man is going to alter.

So what?

There are experts out there that disagree.

Name them.

There are also those who are experts that play the game in order to keep their cash flow, their grants and funding flowing.. Make one claim against the "man made" idea and your funds vanish and your accreditation and lifestyle with it.

Yeah, you don't know how science works. Science has to produce results. If it's a bunch of people just saying what their bosses want them to say, how is that going to produce results?

I work with engineers, educated people and I will tell you this.. I will take 30 years of experience in any field over someone who has nothing to go on but follow some text book.

And I'll take someone who has 30 years of experience in the specific field being discussed over a person who has twice that experience in an unrelated field.

That is an absurd comparison... How about taking your car to a corrupt mechanic that sees you coming? You pay him to change your oil and he claims that you need a $500.00 brake job and fuel filter? Where as your neighborhood mechanic, who actually has your best interest in mind, refutes the money grab, tells you that your brakes are good for another 6 months and the fuel filter only gets changed after 100,000 km....

That's ludicrous. You're inventing a mechanic who is corrupt, but you can't show that climate scientists are corrupt.

So, you know more than he does? You know who to trust and who to dismiss? How?

No, I don't know more than he does.

I trust the people who have spent decades studying this stuff. I may not know too much about the topic, but I'm pretty sure those guys do.

I'll tell you how.. by the words of others.. This is how it works. If someone speaks out against Al Gore and his minions... they discredit and ridicule them...

That's a nice conspiracy theory you've got there.

Then why do I always hear people state, as you did, the vast number of people who support the "man made" climate change hoax.... as an actual piece of credible evidence?
I show you an example of how a government, in Canada, that removed, voided, omitted an entire century of data from their numbers.... a century of data that contradicts their agenda... and you are still blind to the corruption and farce of the "man made" ideal.

Why do so many people accept that nearly every scientists who studies it thinks it's happening means that it's happening?

If you can't figure that out for yourself, then I don't think I can help you.

What data was inaccurate? It's 100 years of data.... Which included the 1930's and 40's where there was a 20 or 30 year stretch of increased temperatures over an entire continent. And they decided not to include it? That is not how real science works.

I was just going by what your own source said.

The scrapping of all observed weather data from 1850 to 1949 was necessary, a spokesman for Environment Canada told Blacklock’s Reporter, after researchers concluded that historically, there weren’t enough weather stations to create a reliable data set for that 100-year period.

“The historical data is not observed historical data,” the spokesman said. “It is modelled historical data … 24 models from historical simulations spanning 1950 to 2005 were used.”

It's literally the second and third paragraphs. Did you nmot read your own source?

You seem to be pretty selective as to where you get your data. There are credible people, websites and media that go against the "man made" climate hoax... You refuse to accept it.

Provide one, and I'll see if it is credible.

Well, not as fast as they have claimed... Sheesh.. take a look at what they have predicted in the past and what has not come to happen...

You mean like this one?

Even 50-year-old climate models correctly predicted global warming

The whole "pause" is not a "pause" it's because we are entering a "solar minimum". The whole thing is cyclic..

If the explanation is that we are entering a solar minimum, why is the temperature rising?

Also, if you think we cannot survive... and adapt to changes.. you haven't studied history.

That's like a kid knocking a hole in the wall, breaking the windows, ripping up the carpet and smashing all the floor tiles and then saying that it doesn't matter because when they were renovating the house was also a mess, so the family should be able to adapt.

Yes, whatever you do don't listen to those that have lived it and can speak against the lies presented by those trying to achieve their agenda.

I get it.. It's much easier to cover your ears and chant "lalalalalalala I can't hear you" when people give you evidence of false agenda...

But, of course, I wouldn't want to give the idea that governments, and big business and higher elite powerful people would lie to you to get your money... Never happens does it?

No worries... Time will reveal this truth.

Yeah, that's a nice conspiracy theory you got there...
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
It's interesting that conspiracy theorists and denialists suddenly claim all evidence is suspect and nothing can be known when people point out that the evidence is against them.
My comments would cover any and all views on this. Nobody has accurate enough data to really state anything.. However, if your going to take what we have.. I still believe it's not created or caused by man.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
So what? Lots of educated people are utterly stupid outside their area of skill. Dr Oz is a skilled heart surgeon, yet he promotes absolute quackery on his show. I don't care what the educated people you've talked to say. The only ones who know what they're talking about are the climate scientists.

Fine, you believe the educated and still utterly stupid people that you want to believe.. I'll believe the ones that I want to.



Yep... so what.



Name them.
Why? So you can insult and ridicule them?




Yeah, you don't know how science works. Science has to produce results. If it's a bunch of people just saying what their bosses want them to say, how is that going to produce results?

I've worked for more than 30 years in a profession that uses applied science. Guess what... Much of science is all fluff and speculation. Only the real solid repeatable science works.. This whole farce of man made global warming.. will be about as real as the ice age that was supposed to come in the 70, or the energy crisis that followed that..

And, other than those who have recently graduated university, who the rest of us argue with, not too many are falling for the whole "man made" part. Most are waiting to see what the excuses are when the weather gets colder again.




And I'll take someone who has 30 years of experience in the specific field being discussed over a person who has twice that experience in an unrelated field.

Fine. You believe who you believe. I'll believe who I believe...It takes a lot to stand up and speak against such a huge fabrication and endure all the hate.



That's ludicrous. You're inventing a mechanic who is corrupt, but you can't show that climate scientists are corrupt.

LOL that's funny.... Try proving the mechanics of this world who rip people off... Try proving that your scientist isn't corrupt... Just look at the email gate.. and the movie Al Gore put out.. That false prophet had so many things that he said ... never happen.. yet he's a billionaire.



No, I don't know more than he does.

I trust the people who have spent decades studying this stuff. I may not know too much about the topic, but I'm pretty sure those guys do.[/quote]

Actually, you trust people who don't bite the hand that feeds them. They know where their grands and other funds come from.. They know how they will be ruined if they don't present the prescribed agenda..

What was it those emails said? Oh ya "what are we going to say? The data doesn't show what we are telling them. "



That's a nice conspiracy theory you've got there.

Nice try. I've been accused of that before, but it's for actual conspiracies...



Why do so many people accept that nearly every scientists who studies it thinks it's happening means that it's happening?

See, that's the tricky part... It is happening and nobody is denying that.. The part that is not true is the "man made" part... they leave that part out.. and everyone goes " oooh ahhhh... we're going to die in 10 years"

If you can't figure that out for yourself, then I don't think I can help you.
That's OK. I'm a big boy.



I was just going by what your own source said.

The scrapping of all observed weather data from 1850 to 1949 was necessary, a spokesman for Environment Canada told Blacklock’s Reporter, after researchers concluded that historically, there weren’t enough weather stations to create a reliable data set for that 100-year period.

“The historical data is not observed historical data,” the spokesman said. “It is modelled historical data … 24 models from historical simulations spanning 1950 to 2005 were used.”

It's literally the second and third paragraphs. Did you nmot read your own source?

So, the data before 1850 was OK but the data that just happened to be the warmest and totally debunked their farce was not reliable?

You don't see anything wrong there? That would never fly in any real science paper.. Tom and Huck's thermometer worked better than the ones that they had in the war that had the bomb... OK.. sure.



Provide one, and I'll see if it is credible.

LOL now you're the judge now? Totally unbiased too....right?



You mean you found a site that supported man made climate change? Must have been hard to do.


If the explanation is that we are entering a solar minimum, why is the temperature rising?
Take a look at the data.. even some pro man made climate scaremongers know that their has been a "pause". "Translation" it stopped warming.



That's like a kid knocking a hole in the wall, breaking the windows, ripping up the carpet and smashing all the floor tiles and then saying that it doesn't matter because when they were renovating the house was also a mess, so the family should be able to adapt.

Actually.. that's a straw man... Nothing has happened, even in the time where it did warm a bit... that happened too fast for us not to handle it.

Wait, however, until you see winters like they had after the warm times of the 30's and 40's... It is cyclic and it's coming....

Bet they even start saying that an ice age is coming and Gretta will be out there shouting about that.



Yeah, that's a nice conspiracy theory you got there...
oooo... twice in one post... what exactly is that supposed to mean? It's already clear that you don't believe the data that contradicts your mainstream science farce... But, you continue with the "conspiracy theory dig"...
 
  • Winner
Reactions: vlman
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Fine, you believe the educated and still utterly stupid people that you want to believe.. I'll believe the ones that I want to.

Yeah, I'll believe the ones who have studied and earned degrees in the relevant fields.

You can believe the ones who have no education in the field in question, but who say what you want to hear.

Yep... so what.

You tell me, you're the one who brought it up as though it was important.

Why? So you can insult and ridicule them?

If they have qualifications in the relevant field and are valid experts on the topic, why would I ridicule them?

I've worked for more than 30 years in a profession that uses applied science. Guess what... Much of science is all fluff and speculation. Only the real solid repeatable science works.. This whole farce of man made global warming.. will be about as real as the ice age that was supposed to come in the 70, or the energy crisis that followed that..

And, other than those who have recently graduated university, who the rest of us argue with, not too many are falling for the whole "man made" part. Most are waiting to see what the excuses are when the weather gets colder again.

Much quantity, little quality.

Fine. You believe who you believe. I'll believe who I believe...It takes a lot to stand up and speak against such a huge fabrication and endure all the hate.

Again with the conspiracy theory. Is that all you;ve got?

LOL that's funny.... Try proving the mechanics of this world who rip people off... Try proving that your scientist isn't corrupt... Just look at the email gate.. and the movie Al Gore put out.. That false prophet had so many things that he said ... never happen.. yet he's a billionaire.

Right. So it's all a conspiracy. Bill Clinton couldn't keep it secret when he and Monica did something naughty, but the tens of thousands of climate scientists can keep all this conspiracy so secret that there's no paperwork, nothing.

Of course.

Actually, you trust people who don't bite the hand that feeds them. They know where their grands and other funds come from.. They know how they will be ruined if they don't present the prescribed agenda..

Again with the conspiracy theory.

The sooner you realise you need some actual evidence instead of conspiracy theories, the better off you'll be.

What was it those emails said? Oh ya "what are we going to say? The data doesn't show what we are telling them. "

And what emails were those?

Nice try. I've been accused of that before, but it's for actual conspiracies...

Of course, all the conspiracy theories you believe are for REAL conspiracies!

See, that's the tricky part... It is happening and nobody is denying that.. The part that is not true is the "man made" part... they leave that part out.. and everyone goes " oooh ahhhh... we're going to die in 10 years"

lol okay.

That's OK. I'm a big boy.

Not that big if you wanted me to explain it to you.

So, the data before 1850 was OK but the data that just happened to be the warmest and totally debunked their farce was not reliable?

So the bits of your sources you like are 100% real and can't be argued, but the bits of those same sources that you DON'T like can be ridiculed and you can make up explanations for it.

Why don't you just admit that you are biased and will only accept evidence that supports your predetermined conclusion and be honest with everyone?

LOL now you're the judge now? Totally unbiased too....right?

So I take it that you can't.

Once again, you are all about making the claims, but when it comes to supporting those claims, you suddenly start making excuses.

You mean you found a site that supported man made climate change? Must have been hard to do.

The models and results are on record, as well as the climate data since that time. If you disagree with them, please tell me where the models do not match the data recorded after the prediction was made.

Take a look at the data.. even some pro man made climate scaremongers know that their has been a "pause". "Translation" it stopped warming.

Thank Goodness we have a skilled climate researcher like you on the case! All those tens of thousands of climate researchers who have been worried about this stuff can relax and go home!

Actually.. that's a straw man... Nothing has happened, even in the time where it did warm a bit... that happened too fast for us not to handle it.

Wait, however, until you see winters like they had after the warm times of the 30's and 40's... It is cyclic and it's coming....

Bet they even start saying that an ice age is coming and Gretta will be out there shouting about that.

I'll tell ya what. When that happens, I'll agree that you were right, okay? Now, how many years do you think it will be before people start claiming an ice age is coming and that global warming was a big mistake? Five years? Ten?

oooo... twice in one post... what exactly is that supposed to mean? It's already clear that you don't believe the data that contradicts your mainstream science farce... But, you continue with the "conspiracy theory dig"...

Why should I believe something that the majority of people in a relevant field have discounted? You have to invent a conspiracy to explain why they discount it, yet you apparently have no problem believing all those thousands of researchers can be paid to keep their mouths shut.

You don't apparently know that reality doesn't work that way. There's always some guy who spills the beans.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,200
3,821
45
✟917,256.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
My comments would cover any and all views on this. Nobody has accurate enough data to really state anything.. However, if your going to take what we have.. I still believe it's not created or caused by man.
Yes, they would.

But I doubt you ever apply them to anything you happen to agree with.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Yes, they would.

But I doubt you ever apply them to anything you happen to agree with.
You "doubt"... Yeah... sounds like a solid argument...

A lot of people "doubted" that Trump would win the election.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, I'll believe the ones who have studied and earned degrees in the relevant fields.

You can believe the ones who have no education in the field in question, but who say what you want to hear.



You tell me, you're the one who brought it up as though it was important.



If they have qualifications in the relevant field and are valid experts on the topic, why would I ridicule them?



Much quantity, little quality.



Again with the conspiracy theory. Is that all you;ve got?



Right. So it's all a conspiracy. Bill Clinton couldn't keep it secret when he and Monica did something naughty, but the tens of thousands of climate scientists can keep all this conspiracy so secret that there's no paperwork, nothing.

Of course.



Again with the conspiracy theory.

The sooner you realise you need some actual evidence instead of conspiracy theories, the better off you'll be.



And what emails were those?



Of course, all the conspiracy theories you believe are for REAL conspiracies!



lol okay.



Not that big if you wanted me to explain it to you.



So the bits of your sources you like are 100% real and can't be argued, but the bits of those same sources that you DON'T like can be ridiculed and you can make up explanations for it.

Why don't you just admit that you are biased and will only accept evidence that supports your predetermined conclusion and be honest with everyone?



So I take it that you can't.

Once again, you are all about making the claims, but when it comes to supporting those claims, you suddenly start making excuses.



The models and results are on record, as well as the climate data since that time. If you disagree with them, please tell me where the models do not match the data recorded after the prediction was made.



Thank Goodness we have a skilled climate researcher like you on the case! All those tens of thousands of climate researchers who have been worried about this stuff can relax and go home!



I'll tell ya what. When that happens, I'll agree that you were right, okay? Now, how many years do you think it will be before people start claiming an ice age is coming and that global warming was a big mistake? Five years? Ten?



Why should I believe something that the majority of people in a relevant field have discounted? You have to invent a conspiracy to explain why they discount it, yet you apparently have no problem believing all those thousands of researchers can be paid to keep their mouths shut.

You don't apparently know that reality doesn't work that way. There's always some guy who spills the beans.
Kylie, I could sit here and type a whole string of retorts to your post and we could keep doing it for days.

However, it's plain that you are set with your view as am I.

I was fed the whole "energy crisis" when I was a kid. I also swallowed all the "ice age cometh" in my youth as well.

This will be just another garden path that the powers that be are leading all the sheep down. It's as real as the USA looking for "weapons of mass destruction" in the middle east.

So, don't hold your breath for oceans rising or the whole population of the world dying because of CO2 levels cooking us.

You can listen all you want to the poster children of academia regurgitating all the false numbers that you want..

In the end.. time reveals the truth. I'm not worried for this planet. I know how the story ends.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums