UN scientists warn time is running out to tackle global warming

OMFG. I'm gonna bookmark this page and refer to it frequently. Whenever somebody tells me that the denizens of Denierstan know Thing 1 about science, I will simply refer them here to prove them wrong. No, I'm sorry, cupcake, but "Conservation of Energy" has absolutely nothing whatever to do with energy conservation. You must have gone to school in Texas. Do you believe in creationism too?

Denier FAIL.

Well then perhaps we can agree on nuclear. Works for me, and for most climate hawks I know.

You've already been doing things, you just don't realize it. Your tax dollars paid for Katrina. Your tax dollars paid for Sandy. Your tax dollars pay and pay, and will continue to pay, for sea level rise, for increasing drought, for more floods, for more refugees from countries that are too poor to fight the floods, the droughts, and the rising seas.

For some odd reason, the right-wing would rather pay all those tax dollars and keep their head in the sand, than to lift a finger to prevent it all from happening in the first place. I simply cannot understand why Republicans love those taxes so much! Can you?

Since you clearly cannot refute the program I'm talking about, and the program many conservative economists are talking about, and the program that has already been successfully implemented in BC, the you simply invent a program you wish I had talked about and try to refute that instead. That's a fundamentally dishonest form of argument called a "strawman". And while I hardly expect the denizens of Denierstan to be honest, I did have hopes for you, Tex. Clearly my hopes were misplaced.

No. What I need from you is proof that the IPCC predicted that Himalayan glaciers would be melted by now, that Miami and New York City would be flooded by now. Show me those allegedly failed predictions, cupcake. Or admit that you've been lied to, taken in by the Ayatollahs of Denierstan.

 

Your political and childish approach to Climate Change is simply sad.

 

So says the guy with zero evidence, and no argument other than the ad-hom. Yeah, you could teach us all a lesson. But you're above all that science and evidence stuff.

 

Hilarious, you speak of ad-hom? You seem to be above all 'all that science and stuff' with your name calling and political agenda.

 

And yet every time you are presented with real evidence, like this:



... you do everything you can to avoid talking about the science, to avoid talking about explanations, to avoid the evidnece.

Do you know why that is? It's because you know, deep in your heart, that if you had to argue on the basis of the evidence, you would lose.

Which is why you never argue on the evidence, and always rely on the ad-hom. And in fact, I'm flatly predicting that you won't talk about the graph above yet again, in your reply. If you do reply.

 

LOL, still hiding where you get the images from eh? You really need to get out and read more on the subject. You will find that there are other sensitivity levels predicted that are quite a bit less than the IPCC's along with the hiatus that is proving the IPCC's sensitivity levels are too high.

 

Antarctic sea ice just set a new April record. Ice conditions are back to normal in the Arctic. Winters have become longer, colder and snowier. With less meltwater, sea levels are barely rising. What if the doomsayers are wrong?

 

There are dozens, if not hundreds, of sensitivity studies out there, but only the very lowest results get talked about on WUWT. The IPCC's range is quite reasonable, given the uncertainty.

And I'm quite happy to discuss my sources, and have frequently before. In fact, the sources are clearly stated at the bottom of the graph.

As for the so-called hiatus, it is not statistically significant.

 

You mean 'NOW' it is not statistically significant after 15 years was. Nothing like moving the goal posts.

 

LOL, a 15 year hiatus is not significant yet the warmists are going crazy trying to explain it, and trying to explain how it caught them totally by surprise. Not to mention warmists trying to hide from why the ice cap is still here, why polar bears are doing just fine, why we haven't had massive increases in tornado's and hurricane's.

 

Or more clearly zbr: to take it out of the hands of those that work and into the hands of those that don't - but do "VOTE", usually two or three times it seems......

- - - Updated - - -

and yet they still claim they can predict the temperature to a 1/10th of a degree a half century from now.....

 

I get a kick out of how the faithful say the models are accurate. Out of about 100, one or two are closer to actual observed temperatures. This is how they claim the models are accurate. That would be like predicting every horse will win the Kentucky Derby and when one does, claiming success in predicting the race.

 

A lot like fortune tellers and seers who make 100 predictions, then when one or two come true they use those as proof that they have the vision into the future. Don't ever mention the ones that didn't.

Hey, I have asked, but none of the deniers of actual lived experience in the envirowacko religion have ever explained the logic behind changing the description of the source of our coming disasters from "global warming" to "climate change". You know, since they claim "global warming" is the problem. And since there has been "climate change" since the beginning of time, which no one denies. Who made the decision to change the nomenclature? Why? Could it be because there really hasn't been any "global warming" like they predicted for 18 years and they have to change the language to keep the rubes putting money in the collection plate?

 

They are trying desperately to make their political agenda matter to the average Joe. They are failing. Notice, though, the increase in dire warnings before the upcoming meeting in Paris. I have noticed an uptick.

 

Here is another one of those failed fear mongering efforts.

Pacific islands growing, not sinking

 

22 inconvenient truths for "climate change" hoaxers.

Lots of data and good discussion on each of the points made. Appears to be real "science", not political scientism.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/12/22-very-inconvenient-climate-truths/

And truth 22 is the reason we have the politicized "science" that has been demonstrated to be wrong.

 

I don't think he can.

- - - Updated - - -

from the guy with no evidence of any global warming. myth and busted. try again when you can actually prove it. leave the data sets alone, stop fudging the historical data to make a model correct. yeah, we know all the trix now it's actually time to put up or shut up.

 

evidence of what? you keep stating that. what is it you need from the side that doesn't believe the alarmist world ending philosophy? Please, I am seeing this in every other post from you. See, you claim a change is needed. prove it. It's really that simple. Think you can? nope didn't think so.

- - - Updated - - -

what is this evidence of?

 

uncertainty? So they don't know. Isn't that what we've said? uncertainty. funny word. means no evidence.

 

Yes, uncertainty. Yet, even with that uncertainty, the "global warming" hoaxers still try to tell us we have transition to living like 16th century peasants because the calamity they continue to predict, decade after decade that never seems to occur, is so dire we must do something NOW or else we will be frying like chickens at KFC.

 

More like insufficient evidence to create absolute surety.

 

or, I have no idea what I'm talking about! I like that one best of all.

 

What's up with the Daily Mail and Watt?

I heard they went gay. No?

- - - Updated - - -

Let's put it this way: time is running out, and when it starts running, faster, those pigs will be playing a game, with all of us.

I'll venture this: act like an n-word, get treated like an n-word is how one police lieutenant told me things would be.

 

reported.

 

Agreed. I hate it when deniers hoaxers and fraudsters demand we live in caves. You only see deniers make that demand. You never see it from the rational people. Many deniers are clearly anti-technology jihadists.

The rational people, the ones who have gotten every prediction right for decades running now, point out we should transition to renewable power sources specifically so we don't have to live in caves. Deniers oppose that tooth and nail. Deniers want everyone forced into those caves so very, very badly. It's like they have a cave fetish.