"Deconstruction Of The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Hypothesis"

[rushmc 18]

This is a very very good read. It will make you think
And expect the source attack because it is hard for the alarmists to argue what is said here


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/17/deconstruction-of-the-anthropogenic-global-warming-agw-hypothesis-2/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[RMK 3]

That's the great thing about the internet; you can always find someone who shares your viewpoint no matter how uninformed and misguided.

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[rushmc 18]

RMK

That's the great thing about the internet; you can always find someone who shares your viewpoint no matter how uninformed and misguided.

Yes

That is why I posted this article. To help those like you to get caught up with reality

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[tonyhays 86]

Quote

Yes

That is why I posted this article. To help those like you to get caught up with reality

Would you help the 97% of scientists who disagree with you get caught up as well?

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

[kallend 1,679]

rushmc

And expect the source attack because it is hard for the alarmists to argue what is said here

Translation - Marc KNOWS this is a junk science source and he's trying a new strategy justify his link.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,475]

It's always a toss-up to see if the RushMC repost of the day is from Wattsupwiththat, Breitbart or Newsmax.

[quade 3]

billvon

It's always a toss-up to see if the RushMC repost of the day is from Wattsupwiththat, Breitbart or Newsmax.

Maybe we should start a pool.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

tonyhays

Quote

Yes

That is why I posted this article. To help those like you to get caught up with reality

Would you help the 97% of scientists who disagree with you get caught up as well?

Sorry to see you are still sucked in by that old debunked like. Any rebuttal to any of the content?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

kallend

***
And expect the source attack because it is hard for the alarmists to argue what is said here

Translation - Marc KNOWS this is a junk science source and he's trying a new strategy justify his link.

No I dont but you dont know this either because you aint got the guts to challenge your religion

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

quade

***It's always a toss-up to see if the RushMC repost of the day is from Wattsupwiththat, Breitbart or Newsmax.

Maybe we should start a pool.

Still no try at rebuttal

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,154]

Quote

Any rebuttal to any of the content?

Why? You will just change the content until it agrees with you.

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

Quote

Any rebuttal to any of the content?

Why? You will just change the content until it agrees with you.

I am not changing anything

Now, care to rebut any of the content?
Should be very easy seeing how you think the science is settled. Right?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

quade

***It's always a toss-up to see if the RushMC repost of the day is from Wattsupwiththat, Breitbart or Newsmax.

Maybe we should start a pool.

Same for you!

If the science is settled then most if not all of the points in the link should be easily rebutted.

Go ahead, have a stab at it.

If you dare.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

billvon

It's always a toss-up to see if the RushMC repost of the day is from Wattsupwiththat, Breitbart or Newsmax.

Don't forget Drudge!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,154]

rushmc

***

Quote

Any rebuttal to any of the content?

Why? You will just change the content until it agrees with you.

I am not changing anything

Now, care to rebut any of the content?
Should be very easy seeing how you think the science is settled. Right?

Everybody here knows that you get yourself all twisted around and start scarmbling in no time flat. You have done it in pretty much every discussion you have had on here.

There is absolutely no point in having a discussion about anything with you.

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

******

Quote

Any rebuttal to any of the content?

Why? You will just change the content until it agrees with you.

I am not changing anything

Now, care to rebut any of the content?
Should be very easy seeing how you think the science is settled. Right?

Everybody here knows that you get yourself all twisted around and start scarmbling in no time flat. You have done it in pretty much every discussion you have had on here.

There is absolutely no point in having a discussion about anything with you.

Translation

You cant do it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,154]

If you want to use that comment to help yourself feel better, have at it

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

If you want to use that comment to help yourself feel better, have at it

At least my points have some meat in them

When compared to your running away

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,475]

>If the science is settled then most if not all of the points in the link should be
>easily rebutted.

>Go ahead, have a stab at it.

Sure; I'll rebut the a few for you. (I know you could really care less about the actual science, but who knows? Someone else may read this)

First off:

"Some parts of this essay rely on a series of air sample chemical analysis done by Georg Beck of CO2 at the surface. I consider the air samplings as having poor quality control, and not necessarily representative of global CO2 levels at those times and locations."

OK so Ball's comments on CO2 are invalid; we will keep that in mind. Next!

"The failed predictions (projections) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are proof that there is something seriously wrong with the science."

IPCC predictions have not failed. Some of the predictions from the FAR (1990):

B, C and D scenarios - forcing was 2.95 W/M^2
Actual forcing as of 2011 - 2.8 W/M^2

Sensitivity for CO2 doubling - 2.5C best estimate (ranges from 1.5 to 4.5C)
Actual sensitivity - 2.1C

Warming - .2C/decade from "best" model
Actual - .15C/decade through 2011

Temperature prediction from the SAR (1995):

Warming predicted - .14C/decade
Actual - .15C/decade

Now we can compare that to denier predictions:
Lindzen: -.1C/decade
Easterbrook : -.15C/decade
Akasofu: no change (0C/decade)
McLean: -7C/decade

So IPCC predictions are very good, and accurately predict what has happened. Next!

Some false assumptions:

>2. If atmospheric CO2 levels increase, the global temperature will increase.

If CO2 levels increase AND EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME global temperatures will increase.

>1. Global temperatures are the highest ever.

No climate scientist thinks that. They were much higher billions of years ago.

>3. CO2 levels are the highest ever.

No climate scientist thinks that. They were much higher millions of years ago.

>4. CO2 levels were much lower before the Industrial Revolution.

Only compared to current levels.

OK so just through the introduction and the first two paragraphs we have one disclaimer saying we can't trust Ball on his statements on CO2 and five misleading or erroneous statements. He does get three things mostly right:


>1. CO2 is a gas with effectively one-way properties that allows sunlight to
>enter the atmosphere but prevents heat from leaving. It supposedly
>functions like the glass in a greenhouse.

Correct!

>2. Global temperatures rose commensurate with the start of the
>Industrial Revolution.

Correct!

>5. CO2 levels continue to rise at a steady rate because of the annual
>contribution of humans.

Mostly correct. They are not rising at a steady rate but they are rising monotonically, and that is primarily (not entirely) due to anthropogenic emissions.

So so far we have 3 correct or mostly correct statements, one that is correct but misses a critical statement and 3 that are completely incorrect. So far he's doing far worse than the IPCC has ever done.

[rushmc 18]

I gotta hit the road and thank you btw for the reply
Much of which I have issue with but do not have time right now but for this

Quote

If CO2 levels increase AND EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME global temperatures will increase.

We do not yet know WHAT EVERYTHING ELSE IS as of right now

This site points this out time and time again

And we also know that when it comes to climate NOTHING EVER STAYS THE SAME!!!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,154]

rushmc

I gotta hit the road and thank you btw for the reply
Much of which I have issue with but do not have time right now but for this

Quote

If CO2 levels increase AND EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME global temperatures will increase.

We do not yet know WHAT EVERYTHING ELSE IS as of right now

This site points this out time and time again

And we also know that when it comes to climate NOTHING EVER STAYS THE SAME!!!

LMAO

Which doesn't dispute the science though.

Not knowing what everything else is, doesn't mean that when none of it changes, global temperatures would increase if CO2 levels increase.

[billvon 2,475]

>We do not yet know WHAT EVERYTHING ELSE IS as of right now

That's right. We also don't know what EVERYTHING ELSE IS that can kill you. But we still know that smoking two packs of cigarettes a day is bad for you, and might kill you. The fact that other things also can kill you does not diminish the risk of smoking.

[SkyDekker 1,154]

billvon

>We do not yet know WHAT EVERYTHING ELSE IS as of right now

That's right. We also don't know what EVERYTHING ELSE IS that can kill you. But we still know that smoking two packs of cigarettes a day is bad for you, and might kill you. The fact that other things also can kill you does not diminish the risk of smoking.

Please......

My grandfather smoked 3 packs a day until he died at 65, but he never got lung cancer.

[rehmwa 2]

SkyDekker

***>We do not yet know WHAT EVERYTHING ELSE IS as of right now

That's right. We also don't know what EVERYTHING ELSE IS that can kill you. But we still know that smoking two packs of cigarettes a day is bad for you, and might kill you. The fact that other things also can kill you does not diminish the risk of smoking.

Please......

My grandfather smoked 3 packs a day until he died at 65, but he never got lung cancer.

no, he probably gave it to 3 or 4 people around him, plus aggravated 100 people with asthma, and gave headaches and migraines to thousands more - but, that's ok. HE was fine.

now that I think about it, much likely the same result as reading posts on speaker's corner for the same interval

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[SkyDekker 1,154]

Quote

no, he probably gave it to 3 or 4 people around him, plus aggravated 100 people with asthma, and gave headaches and migraines to thousands more - but, that's ok. HE was fine.

There is absolutely no evidence to prove that not having lung cancer gives lung cancer to other people.

What are you, some kind of lung cancer alarmist?