The models they were certain of only 8 years ago turned out to need large corrections.
As the denialists keep spamming, the theory of gravity is constantly updated by physicists. That's what scientists do: improve on theories with new data and superior models - something denialists have yet to do. This "large correction" stuff is nothing more than an empty talking point.
The extra storms were were supposed to see are lacking.
New England. Heard of it? Worst storm in 75 years. Know any girls named Katrina?
And it's a problem that several people who oppose climate warming are in bed with the oil companies and pretty skeevy.
Climate change is real. It's happening. Models going back even 30 years have been remarkably prescient. So go on and test that theory of gravity with your foot an an anvil, since quantum string theory is "constantly being updated" and models from ten years ago don't exactly explain how dark matter works.
If you think Helen Thomas's statement *weren't* antisimitic, then I don't know what to tell you.
That's the problem for Zionists: they weren't. Immigrants from Europe do not have more rights to the land than the people actually living there. That was true during the invasion of North America, and it's true for the Zionist land theft and ethnic cleansing of the last 65 years. The formation of Israel was impossible without that, since Jews numbered less than 10% of the population at 1900. The entirety of the "Jewish state" of Israel made up of first or second generation immigrants living on stolen land.
If she had said "Everyone of Mexican descent, event those born in the US, should go "home" to Mexico." she would have gotten a similar reaction.
Nonsense. Here, lets fix your analogy: Helen Thomas told white Europeans to get out of the southwest and give it back to the Mexican and Indians who has been living there before. And told them that in the 1890's, a mere 45 years after the Mexican-American war.
That's not convincing. Substantiate your assertions.
It's not like it wasn't obvious. You're acting out of faith to a concept despite all evidence to the contrary, same as Jenny McCarthy, high priestess of the anti-vaxxers.
NONE of the models in the IPCC come close to predicting the current pause in temperature (nearly 17 years long at this point) - meaning those theories put together by all the smart people are wrong. That's science. When facts and theory collide, theory should lose.
What they AC said: there is no "pause".
Some information for you
Some basic reality checking for you: the only thing you're doing is the time-honored denialist tactic of pointing to events and saying "see! see! this proves climate change is a myth!" without bothering to know what you're talking about. You know, stuff like record blizzards hitting New England or an increase in snowfall at the poles, without mentioning that warmer air carries more moisture.
You clowns have gotten so bad there's an entire database of debunked denialist arguments because when one of your talking points falls apart you just move on to the next one.
Way to go genius. That does not prove the world is warming. If that was true, than since the last 12 years of my life have been "the tallest years of my life" this would mean I am still growing. It would mean every adult human on this planet including your grandmother is still growing taller. Sorry, you are just ignorant of basic statistics and for fucks sake as you say, learn some basic STAT.
Way to go genius. The point is that the last 12 years being the warmest on record directly contradicts the lie that we've been in a 17 year long "pause" in global warming. For fucks sake, learn some basic reading comprehension.
A scientist is like any other person. An economist can make a stupid purchase, an athlete can blow off training, a soldier can fall asleep on duty, a doctor can confuse two medications in his head and kill a patient, a priest can commit what he thinks his imaginary friend considers a "sin" (whatever that is...) a hunter can miss his target, a woman can forget something her boyfriend or husband did that was wrong, and yes, a scientist can ignore good and proper scientific method, botch an experiment, misinterpret data, etc.
Hand waving. You might want to Google the "scientific method" and "peer review" before going on about "sins" and "athletic training" and who knows who many other analogies that have no relevance to how science works.
The irony of the fool who lectures on the true nature of science, yet understands not the difference between experiment, measurement, and model. Climb down off that horse, and untangle these things in your mind. Global climate is not an experiment - at least, not one under conditions controlled by scientists. It is what it is, and models are only approximations of this reality.
The tiresome fool who thinks he's clever.
Do geologists not have "experiments, measurements and models" because they say the Grand Caynon was formed by erosion over millions of years? How about evolutionary biologists who study the fossil record of humans or horses over millions of years? Of course they have measurements and models, and so do climate scientists. Did you think about this nonsense at all before throwing it up onto your keyboard?
But this is beating a dead horse, because when even when scientists paid by the Kochs to deny climate look at the evidence and say "yeah, there's climate change", it's time for you clowns to get the fuck out of here.
submit your argument is moronic. The average American does not want to live like an average Kenyan and I suspect the average Kenyan does not live like the average Kenyan by choice. ( I am aware parts of Kenya are quite affluent and modern, but we are talking average which means the desperately poor areas pull the mean condition down a great deal).
You might want to spend two seconds thinking about this before you're the moron. Whether or not the average American wants to live like the average Kenyan is irrelevant when the subject is Americans blaming people in places like Kenya for having too many babies. Because there would have to be almost 10 billion Kenyans before that country would equal the United States in resource consumption.
In general the Environment is better served by affluence than poverty for a given population.
Nonsense, see above.
Affluent people have resources to invest in things like waste water treatment, proper trash disposal, the replanting of forests, defense of nature preserves etc.
Oh FFS. Affluent people own multiple cars, eat fruit that was transported from across the planet, build 3,000 square foot homes, and life in poorly insulated homes with heat and air conditioning. It's not poor people in Kenya strip mining the Congo to provide precious minerals for your smart phones and blowing up mountains to remove coal, it's your "affluent people".
No I think the problem is very much one of population.
Anything to avoid taking responsibility for your actions.
You are now at double population, living in current conditions with pollution/global warning in same situation as now.
If by "same" you mean "far less than 1980", then sure.
There are too many people.
That's a comfort lie first worlders tell to blame the problem on poor people having too many babies, which doesn't fly when you're using 32 times as many resources as people in developing countries.
You are saying 'if we eat less, we can fit 14 billion rabbits on our island'.
I'm saying we can easily support more people on a more modest lifestyle, much less our current population. That doesn't mean we turn into North Coreans[sic] like the willfully obtuse AC just above you. It means we recycle more, built more mass transit, invest in green energy and use less land.
"root cause of the problem" is too many human beings.
No, it's resource consumption. The planet could support double the number of people we have now if we restrained ourselves to Cuban levels of consumption.
All of the woes that you mention such as pollution are caused by excessive population.
A comfort lie first-worlders tell to absolve themselves of responsibility for their resource consumption. It's not people living in Cuba dumping all that plastic waste into the ocean. The average American uses the same amount of resources as 32 Kenyans.
Not everyone drives a new vehicle, sonny. The point, of course, is that most of the maintenance on a car deals with the wear from a gasoline engine, which electrics don't have.
Will a Google SWAT team show up at your house based on emails about hydroponics? No, but one from the DEA might.
Facebook and Google want to sell ads. Whereas the government wants to prosecute people with illegally gathered evidence, as when the NSA feeds data to the DEA. Pretty fucking serious difference.
Slashdot Mirror
As the denialists keep spamming, the theory of gravity is constantly updated by physicists. That's what scientists do: improve on theories with new data and superior models - something denialists have yet to do. This "large correction" stuff is nothing more than an empty talking point.
New England. Heard of it? Worst storm in 75 years. Know any girls named Katrina?
And even those people say climate change is happening when they actually look at that data.
Climate change is real. It's happening. Models going back even 30 years have been remarkably prescient. So go on and test that theory of gravity with your foot an an anvil, since quantum string theory is "constantly being updated" and models from ten years ago don't exactly explain how dark matter works.
"If you can read" - says the guy with zero reading comprehension.
There was a coup.
In Iran.
In 1953.
Launched by the U.S. and Britain.
Deal with it.
That's the problem for Zionists: they weren't. Immigrants from Europe do not have more rights to the land than the people actually living there. That was true during the invasion of North America, and it's true for the Zionist land theft and ethnic cleansing of the last 65 years. The formation of Israel was impossible without that, since Jews numbered less than 10% of the population at 1900. The entirety of the "Jewish state" of Israel made up of first or second generation immigrants living on stolen land.
Nonsense. Here, lets fix your analogy: Helen Thomas told white Europeans to get out of the southwest and give it back to the Mexican and Indians who has been living there before. And told them that in the 1890's, a mere 45 years after the Mexican-American war.
It's not like it wasn't obvious. You're acting out of faith to a concept despite all evidence to the contrary, same as Jenny McCarthy, high priestess of the anti-vaxxers.
What they AC said: there is no "pause".
Some basic reality checking for you: the only thing you're doing is the time-honored denialist tactic of pointing to events and saying "see! see! this proves climate change is a myth!" without bothering to know what you're talking about. You know, stuff like record blizzards hitting New England or an increase in snowfall at the poles, without mentioning that warmer air carries more moisture.
You clowns have gotten so bad there's an entire database of debunked denialist arguments because when one of your talking points falls apart you just move on to the next one.
Way to go genius. The point is that the last 12 years being the warmest on record directly contradicts the lie that we've been in a 17 year long "pause" in global warming. For fucks sake, learn some basic reading comprehension.
Hand waving. You might want to Google the "scientific method" and "peer review" before going on about "sins" and "athletic training" and who knows who many other analogies that have no relevance to how science works.
The tiresome fool who thinks he's clever.
Do geologists not have "experiments, measurements and models" because they say the Grand Caynon was formed by erosion over millions of years? How about evolutionary biologists who study the fossil record of humans or horses over millions of years? Of course they have measurements and models, and so do climate scientists. Did you think about this nonsense at all before throwing it up onto your keyboard?
But this is beating a dead horse, because when even when scientists paid by the Kochs to deny climate look at the evidence and say "yeah, there's climate change", it's time for you clowns to get the fuck out of here.
That's just your problem, I'm not.
Comparing auto labor to auto labor is apples to oranges? Sure it's not Randian butthurt that your fantasies don't match reality?
I said cars, not "motor vehicles", which includes everything from mopeds to semis.
Do you think more people living there than the rest of the planet combined might have something to do with that?
Irrelevant when the subject is who's really driving climate change.
Lets not. You'd have to have almost 10 billion Kenyans before that country would equal the United States in resource consumption.
You might want to spend two seconds thinking about this before you're the moron. Whether or not the average American wants to live like the average Kenyan is irrelevant when the subject is Americans blaming people in places like Kenya for having too many babies. Because there would have to be almost 10 billion Kenyans before that country would equal the United States in resource consumption.
Nonsense, see above.
Oh FFS. Affluent people own multiple cars, eat fruit that was transported from across the planet, build 3,000 square foot homes, and life in poorly insulated homes with heat and air conditioning. It's not poor people in Kenya strip mining the Congo to provide precious minerals for your smart phones and blowing up mountains to remove coal, it's your "affluent people".
Anything to avoid taking responsibility for your actions.
Right, which is why Germany builds twice as many cars as the U.S. while paying their unionized workers twice as much.
If by "same" you mean "far less than 1980", then sure.
That's a comfort lie first worlders tell to blame the problem on poor people having too many babies, which doesn't fly when you're using 32 times as many resources as people in developing countries.
I'm saying we can easily support more people on a more modest lifestyle, much less our current population. That doesn't mean we turn into North Coreans[sic] like the willfully obtuse AC just above you. It means we recycle more, built more mass transit, invest in green energy and use less land.
No, it's resource consumption. The planet could support double the number of people we have now if we restrained ourselves to Cuban levels of consumption.
Then what explains his behaving like a creationist, and why does anyone listen to him?
Because you and Dyson share the same religion.
A comfort lie first-worlders tell to absolve themselves of responsibility for their resource consumption. It's not people living in Cuba dumping all that plastic waste into the ocean. The average American uses the same amount of resources as 32 Kenyans.
I know they are various models, the point is that smearing them as "alarmist" doesn't work if they've been understating the rate of change.
Not everyone drives a new vehicle, sonny. The point, of course, is that most of the maintenance on a car deals with the wear from a gasoline engine, which electrics don't have.
With open sarcasm, after the proposal was already made. Give us your weapons in a week and maybe we wont bomb you.
Will a Google SWAT team show up at your house based on emails about hydroponics? No, but one from the DEA might.
Facebook and Google want to sell ads. Whereas the government wants to prosecute people with illegally gathered evidence, as when the NSA feeds data to the DEA. Pretty fucking serious difference.