Climate Change (Global Warming) 🥶🌍🌞

[Markduc]

People on here (including me) would not think about challenging articles in a Mathematics journal - because we do not have the expertise of course.

Yet the same people consider they have expertise in Climate and Meteorology and post some popularly disseminated "graphs" and actually think they have the knowledge base to challenge evidence based academic Climate study.

None of you (nor me) would understand a peer reviewed academic journal article on Climate.

The usual course is that we trust Engineers to build bridges and structures that are sound. We trust neurosurgery innovations once they are peer reviewed and authorised.

But with Climate everyone seems to think they have a doctorate in Atmospheric Physics. It's pathetic.

Why do they side line any scientists that disagree (with evidence ) or the media bury scientific reports that show the greenies are wrong
I think most people who disagree with the green thing do so because they recognize a hypocrite spouting bullshit when the see one
even the head of the supposedly independent IPPC said it was being overhyped
look at the scientific claims from the last 50yrs none not one has come to pass

 

[Exige]

People on here (including me) would not think about challenging articles in a Mathematics journal - because we do not have the expertise of course.

Yet the same people consider they have expertise in Climate and Meteorology and post some popularly disseminated "graphs" and actually think they have the knowledge base to challenge evidence based academic Climate study.

None of you (nor me) would understand a peer reviewed academic journal article on Climate.

The usual course is that we trust Engineers to build bridges and structures that are sound. We trust neurosurgery innovations once they are peer reviewed and authorised.

But with Climate everyone seems to think they have a doctorate in Atmospheric Physics. It's pathetic.

Aww bless you, you keep on following Greta

 

[Dukesox]

People on here (including me) would not think about challenging articles in a Mathematics journal - because we do not have the expertise of course.

Yet the same people consider they have expertise in Climate and Meteorology and post some popularly disseminated "graphs" and actually think they have the knowledge base to challenge evidence based academic Climate study.

None of you (nor me) would understand a peer reviewed academic journal article on Climate.

The usual course is that we trust Engineers to build bridges and structures that are sound. We trust neurosurgery innovations once they are peer reviewed and authorised.

But with Climate everyone seems to think they have a doctorate in Atmospheric Physics. It's pathetic.

Some well known & recent scientific mistakes :-

Thalidomide is safe to give to pregnant women.
The coelacanth is extinct.
Dinosaurs were reptiles.
Red Ducatis are faster than yellow ones.

As previously stated, most of us accept climate change happens but don`t accept it is all our fault or that switching from ice to electric cars is solving any problems.
The science is settled, what lunacy is that ?

 

[Markduc]

Some well known & recent scientific mistakes :-

Thalidomide is safe to give to pregnant women.
The coelacanth is extinct.
Dinosaurs were reptiles.
Red Ducatis are faster than yellow ones.

As previously stated, most of us accept climate change happens but don`t accept it is all our fault or that switching from ice to electric cars is solving any problems.
The science is settled, what lunacy is that ?

Do you work for the ippc , yellow ducatis are faster

 

[Dukesox]

Do you work for the ippc , yellow ducatis are faster

No, I work for this man . Sworn enemy of this man.

 

[Everclear]

Yes we trust engineers to build bridges, but we don't always trust the ones saying that we need a new bridge. That is the difference.

There are many scientists who are qualified to do so, that say there is no climate crisis, and that man has little to no bearing on any changes.

The proposition that the consensus of climate scientists regarding man made climate change is a conspiracy of self interest is laughable.

The minority that deny the existence of man made climate change are just the detritus in what has been established.

Climate Science is most certainly not dominated by meta-analysis with a pre-determined agenda. Rather, it rests in the orthodox tradition of rational science.

Instead of reading what journo's turn out with a rhetorical flush, read an example (you lot will be too lazy) of peer-reviewed, thoroughly referenced climate science. If you give it a go but find yourself well out of your depth, you are in the same position I referred to above of the layman trying to challenge a Mathematical journal article.

You (nor I) am in any position to challenge Science duly practised coming to the irresistible conclusion that humanity has and will continue to impact the climate globally.

Enjoy the Article, insofar as you can understand it.

Rising sea level and increasing tropical cyclone frequency are threatening the population of San Andrés Island, Colombia, western Caribbean | PDF | Coral Reef | Tropical Cyclones

 

[Hugo Magnus]

If the blade runners haven't disconnected ULEZ in your area yet. There's other ways to avoid them.

https://t.me/TommyRobinsonNews

www.bitchute.com

 

[Exige]

The proposition that the consensus of climate scientists regarding man made climate change is a conspiracy of self interest is laughable.

The minority that deny the existence of man made climate change are just the detritus in what has been established.

Climate Science is most certainly not dominated by meta-analysis with a pre-determined agenda. Rather, it rests in the orthodox tradition of rational science.

Instead of reading what journo's turn out with a rhetorical flush, read an example (you lot will be too lazy) of peer-reviewed, thoroughly referenced climate science. If you give it a go but find yourself well out of your depth, you are in the same position I referred to above of the layman trying to challenge a Mathematical journal article.

You (nor I) am in any position to challenge Science duly practised coming to the irresistible conclusion that humanity has and will continue to impact the climate globally.

Enjoy the Article, insofar as you can understand it.

Rising sea level and increasing tropical cyclone frequency are threatening the population of San Andrés Island, Colombia, western Caribbean | PDF | Coral Reef | Tropical Cyclones

Oh deary deary me, your climate experts are saying Cyclones have decreased due to Climate Change!!!!!!!!!!! Now what you gonna do



While cyclone frequency has declined over 1900-2012 in six of the seven regions the study investigates, the researchers find a slight increase in the North Atlantic, driven by a rising trend over recent decades. They suggest that this is due to a combination of natural variability and a decrease in local air pollution.27 Jun 2022

Tropical cyclones now '13% less frequent' due to climate change​

https://www.carbonbrief.org/tropical-cyclones-now-13-less-frequent-due-to-climate-change/#:~:text=While%20cyclone%20frequency%20has%20declined,decrease%20in%20local%20air%20pollution.

 

[Markduc]

My prediction is the green conspiracy loons will change “climate change “
to climate shift, in the same way they went from global warming to climate change once people cottoned on that the warming wasn’t happening

 

[Dox]

The proposition that the consensus of climate scientists regarding man made climate change is a conspiracy of self interest is laughable.

The minority that deny the existence of man made climate change are just the detritus in what has been established.

Climate Science is most certainly not dominated by meta-analysis with a pre-determined agenda. Rather, it rests in the orthodox tradition of rational science.

Instead of reading what journo's turn out with a rhetorical flush, read an example (you lot will be too lazy) of peer-reviewed, thoroughly referenced climate science. If you give it a go but find yourself well out of your depth, you are in the same position I referred to above of the layman trying to challenge a Mathematical journal article.

You (nor I) am in any position to challenge Science duly practised coming to the irresistible conclusion that humanity has and will continue to impact the climate globally.

Enjoy the Article, insofar as you can understand it.

Rising sea level and increasing tropical cyclone frequency are threatening the population of San Andrés Island, Colombia, western Caribbean | PDF | Coral Reef | Tropical Cyclones

How do you know the consensus of climate scientists believe in man made global warming? The answer is, you don't. You just believe that is the case because you trust authority without question.

Are you aware of groups like Global Climate Intelligence Group? That one has 1600+ members who state there is no climate emergency.

Rising sea levels? Utter, utter crap. Banks still offer long term mortgages on seaside properties...shipping ports are still being built and extended based on current sea levels - projects worth many £billions.

As for "you nor I are in a position to challenge science" - everyone can question science. Especially when they are based on model predictions. It's obvious you bow to authority of any kind.

 

[Markduc]

If the climate crisis is as dangerous to the western world as is being made out
wouldn’t those governments be putting extreme pressure on the biggest polluters
its as though pollution made elsewhere doesn’t effect the western world

 

[Everclear]

Oh deary deary me, your climate experts are saying Cyclones have decreased due to Climate Change!!!!!!!!!!! Now what you gonna do



While cyclone frequency has declined over 1900-2012 in six of the seven regions the study investigates, the researchers find a slight increase in the North Atlantic, driven by a rising trend over recent decades. They suggest that this is due to a combination of natural variability and a decrease in local air pollution.27 Jun 2022

Tropical cyclones now '13% less frequent' due to climate change​

Tropical cyclones now ‘13% less frequent’ due to climate change - Carbon Brief.

Your response is amusing. Look at you playing Climate Scientist.

What are your qualifications and professional experience in this discipline? SFA.

A similar phenomenon occurs in practising law - the absolute worst clients are those who think, with misplaced confidence, that they have some knowledge of the Law. The Practitioner then has the laborious task of trying to re-educate their client before they can provide advice, instead of just giving advice ab initio.

 

[Hugo Magnus]

Whereas Exi is void ab inito?

 

[Exige]

Your response is amusing. Look at you playing Climate Scientist.

What are your qualifications and professional experience in this discipline? SFA.

A similar phenomenon occurs in practising law - the absolute worst clients are those who think, with misplaced confidence, that they have some knowledge of the Law. The Practitioner then has the laborious task of trying to re-educate their client before they can provide advice, instead of just giving advice ab initio.

 

[Markduc]

Your response is amusing. Look at you playing Climate Scientist.

What are your qualifications and professional experience in this discipline? SFA.

A similar phenomenon occurs in practising law - the absolute worst clients are those who think, with misplaced confidence, that they have some knowledge of the Law. The Practitioner then has the laborious task of trying to re-educate their client before they can provide advice, instead of just giving advice ab initio.

The next time you are worshipping at the alter of saint greta
pause for contemplation, think what’s next when windmills and lithium don’t save the world
land use is the informed answer, as in farming
what are Australia’s largest exports
moo-cows and wheat
poor children

 

[Exige]

Whereas Exi is void ab inito?

My 'educated' guess is that Everclear is a shit Barista

 

[Hugo Magnus]

The next time you are worshipping at the alter of saint greta
pause for contemplation, think what’s next when windmills and lithium don’t save the world
land use is the informed answer, as in farming
what are Australia’s largest exports
moo-cows and wheat
poor children

They used to import the "poor children"

 

[Markduc]

They used to import the "poor children"

I think the uk used to send them rejects

 

[The skitz]

I think the uk used to send them rejects

The paddy's still do

 

[Everclear]

How do you know the consensus of climate scientists believe in man made global warming? The answer is, you don't. You just believe that is the case because you trust authority without question.

Are you aware of groups like Global Climate Intelligence Group? That one has 1600+ members who state there is no climate emergency.

Rising sea levels? Utter, utter crap. Banks still offer long term mortgages on seaside properties...shipping ports are still being built and extended based on current sea levels - projects worth many £billions.

As for "you nor I are in a position to challenge science" - everyone can question science. Especially when they are based on model predictions. It's obvious you bow to authority of any kind.

This is embarrassing.

GCIG has been thoroughly discredited as just another denial sham.

You state, time and again, that I bow to authority. As a Lawyer a central tenet of my profession is to question and investigate the foundation of any purported source of authority.

You are incapable of questioning in any sensible way disciplines such as physics, chemistry or mathematics. The disciplines that fall within the umbrella of "climate science" are no different - they simply find themselves in the political crosshairs for questioning the impact of the enormously powerful energy industry.

You remind me of those in the '80s denying any link between smoking and cancer. Hell, you probably still believe that.

 

[Dox]

GCIL is simply a large group of scientists and professionals who state that there is no climate emergency. There is nothing to 'debunk'. Don't tell me...were the debunkers fact-checkers by any chance?

You may be a lawyer - that doesn't necessarily mean you're a good one.

I don't need to know anything about chemistry physics or mathematics to know that multi £billion projects wouldn't get the green light, much less the funding, if there was a chance they would be compromised because of rising sea levels. That is logic. Something that seems alien to you (given that you always revert to 'what's your source'?).

Anyway, arguing with you on this is futile, and you probably have a Just Stop Oil protest to attend, so trot on.

 

[Markduc]

 

[Noobie]

You state, time and again, that I bow to authority. As a Lawyer a central tenet of my profession is to question and investigate the foundation of any purported source of authority.

The problem with that statement is that two Lawyers can see the same evidence in completely different ways. That is why there is rarely just one lawyer in any court case, let alone a court case using multiple "experts".

What we do know is history is littered with "expert claims" that years later is shown to be pure bunkum

 

[Everclear]

What we do know is history is littered with "expert claims" that years later is shown to be pure bunkum

It is ironic you should favour the inexpert over the expert. Possibly some jealousy at play.

 

[Hugo Magnus]

Expert:
Ex is a has been, and spurt is a drip out of control

 

[Noobie]

It is ironic you should favour the inexpert over the expert. Possibly some jealousy at play.

Jealous of what exactly? Most of the environmental scare stories are based on predictions but mostly modelling of predictions. On that basis, the computer is only as bad as the information put in.

Your honour I'd like to offer exhibit Severn Cullis-Suzuki who at the age of 12 in 1992, spoke at the United nations and spoke with environmental catastrophe of the future world.

Now 43, she jets all around the world every year, telling people be kind to the planet (apparently she's never heard of zoom conference calls). Why doesn't she use zoom but will travel all over the world yearly? In the simplest of terms, her one woman shows see's her get paid.

 

[RA5]

Climate change is just a money grab. That's it.

 

[Exige]

It is ironic you should favour the inexpert over the expert. Possibly some jealousy at play.

So are storms getting worse or less due to Man Made Climate Change - you appear to ignore simple questions that you can't answer

 

[Dox]

Climate change is just a money grab. That's it.

I'd say it's more about control (yes, one of the ways they do that is by taking more money away from us). We will become more and more restricted in our free movement (15 minute cities...own nothing and be happy, etc).

 

[WAYNE]

I'd say it's more about control (yes, one of the ways they do that is by taking more money away from us). We will become more and more restricted in our free movement (15 minute cities...own nothing and be happy, etc).

Life is a facade, it's all there to keep us under the energy and banking system, the dream of Nikola Tesla of free energy was closed down, imagine that!!