Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Climate change denier appointed head of NOAA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
    You're the ones screeching global warming.
    Nothing I've said here can be fairly characterized as 'screeching' global warming. I have said

    (1) that policies which have limited the clearly of dead wood and scruff have contributed to the problem, perhaps in a major way
    (2) global warming has led to the extended drought and higher temperatures that have made the outcome worse.

    Those are simply the facts of the situation.
    My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

    If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

    This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
      That 97 percent nonsense has been long debunked.
      By who, the 3%?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Ronson View Post
        Climate Change is a huge subject with a ton of nuance. You know that so you should admit that.

        So calling someone a "denier" is worthless. What part does he "deny"? All of it? Some of it? A tiny bit? There's nothing in your OP
        He is in fact a Climate Change denier. No, the subject is not a ton of nuance. The rise of CO2, average world temperature, and desertification since the Industrial Revolution is directly documented, no nuance involved.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          MM - your anti-science ignorance is legendary.
          Only in your mind, my very young padawan.
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by JimL View Post
            By who, the 3%?
            By people that actually looked into that study and saw that it included studies and scientists that said nothing about global warming, and counted them as support/agreement of global warming.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              He is in fact a Climate Change denier. No, the subject is not a ton of nuance. The rise of CO2, average world temperature, and desertification since the Industrial Revolution is directly documented, no nuance involved.
              Nope. He accepts climate change , just not the Catastrophist extreme positions

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
                Nope. He accepts climate change , just not the Catastrophist extreme positions
                not accurate G. He does not accept that the marked rise in CO2 in the atmosphere has human origin. And that is borderline bonkers. And that is why he gets labeled a denier.
                My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  not accurate G. He does not accept that the marked rise in CO2 in the atmosphere has human origin. And that is borderline bonkers. And that is why he gets labeled a denier.
                  Again I already provided quotes from your own wiki source which indicate he is not a "denier".

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
                    Nope. He accepts climate change , just not the Catastrophist extreme positions
                    IOW, he's just not dogmatic enough for the more fervent adherents. That's what it sounds like.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
                      Again I already provided quotes from your own wiki source which indicate he is not a "denier".
                      No you haven't. All you have 'shown' is that he is willing to admit climate change is 'possible'. But in the details, he denies that the CO2 rise is anthropogenic or even necessarily a significant contributor to warming. Do you have a basic knowledge of what the actual theory is wrt anthropogenic global warming? It doesn't appear so base on your comments so far. Denying the CO2 is anthropogenic is denying the climate change is anthropogenic.

                      Indeed, the bolded sentence is the only part of your counter to me you seem to have paid attention to:

                      Source: wikipedia

                      In his lectures, Legates has acknowledged that humans have a direct impact on the environment. However he has disputed large scale climatological studies where he claims that researchers fail to incorporate sufficient data involving increased solar activity, water vapor as a greenhouse gas, data contamination through expansion of the urban heat island effect surrounding data collection points, and many other key variables in addition to the human chemical emissions that are the sole focus of many climatological studies.

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      What you don't seem to read or understood the significance of is that this:

                      "fail to incorporate sufficient data involving increased solar activity"

                      it has been shown time and time again that solar activity changes (e.g. sunspots) can't account for anywhere near the change in insolation required to create the observed change

                      "water vapor as a greenhouse gas"

                      another standard denier red herring. water vapor is fixed in quantity based on atmospheric conditions and temperature, it is a feed back, not a driver. As the planet warms, there is more water vapor that the atmosphere can hold, and that does enhance the warming effect of the CO2, but water vapor is not a driver, a primary cause. If you need more information on this, feel free to ask, but Legates should know this

                      "data contamination through expansion of the urban heat island effect surrounding data collection points"

                      [i]and yet another favorite of sites like Watts up etc. Uban heat island effect has been well accounted for, as has been shown by comparing the indicated warming derived from the USHCN and the USCRN during the period where USCRN data is available.

                      His objections to the consensus view ARE the objections of the climate change deniers like WATTS UP. And no wonder, he has the same funding source - the Fossil fuel industry.
                      Last edited by oxmixmudd; 09-15-2020, 12:12 PM.
                      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by seanD View Post
                        IOW, he's just not dogmatic enough for the more fervent adherents. That's what it sounds like.
                        That is not it at all seanD. If you read my previous post, I point out three basic elements of the standard denier cadre of objections that Legates raises in his objections to the consensus opinion, and I explain exactly what is wrong with those objections. The issue is that he is not dealing with the science correctly, and it is obvious to those that are up on what the data is, what the physics is. Why he is doing that is anyone's guess, but he's just wrong when he raises those objections, and when he denies that humans are the primary driver for the monotonic rise in CO2 we see, and which has taken us past 400ppm in the last few years, a level higher than any time in the last 3 million years.
                        My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                        If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                        This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          He is in fact a Climate Change denier.
                          That still means nothing.

                          No, the subject is not a ton of nuance.
                          You haven't looked very deeply into it then. It's not a black-and-white, one-or-zero proposition.

                          The rise of CO2, average world temperature, and desertification since the Industrial Revolution is directly documented, no nuance involved.
                          Documented but not correlated?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                            That still means nothing.



                            You haven't looked very deeply into it then. It's not a black-and-white, one-or-zero proposition.



                            Documented but not correlated?
                            Climate change denier. ^

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by JimL View Post
                              Climate change denier. ^
                              ^ incapable of supporting his position

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Ronson View Post
                                ^ incapable of supporting his position
                                I notice you're not engaging those that can ...
                                My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                                If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                                This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                234 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                189 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                311 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X