A compilation by bureaucrats of cherry picked literature. Often misrepresented.
But woe to the scientists that speak their minds and disagree with how the IPCC have presented their work. Because they just arent heard from again... funding denied.
In this new world, where there is a vendetta against all human beings by way of climate change alarmism, quality of life is not a consideration.
When discussing CO2 all the negatives are quantified, but the positives seem to never make the cut.
Cheap energy is the #1 reason for modern society, quality of life, pursuit of leisure activities, medical break throughs, higher education available to the masses, life expectancy, etc.
Last year the east coast all the way up to Canada has unusual cold for pretty much the whole winter.
Started early in November and ended in late March.
It was steady -20C for weeks on end overall probably months.
Were as this year (here in Montreal) we have had 4 days in the last week of -20 and the rest of the winter has been pretty mild.
Its par for the course with El Nino years though. Nothing much to see. It'll be very cold next year, it being a La Nina year, but then, the peanut gallery will be quite about that.
It is unfortunate that seemingly educated and smart people would believe such a subject is a yes / no question.
That you would reduce the whole of climate science importance down to a yes / no question, just shows how much the media have managed to educate so many into thinking it is so simple.
I am at a loss of words to express how wrong your perception of the subject is.
Slashdot Mirror
#2 Democrats, because the know better than the populace.
Point to accurate modeling (with reasonable error bars) of cloud feedback that supports your point. (source)
Speculate much?
You see, thats why reasonable people dont buy into your scaremongering. These made up bullshit numbers like 1000 in less than 200 years...
A compilation by bureaucrats of cherry picked literature. Often misrepresented.
But woe to the scientists that speak their minds and disagree with how the IPCC have presented their work. Because they just arent heard from again... funding denied.
So you like to pretend.
However, its just not true.
You realize how much like a doomsday religious preacher that sounded right?
There is so much wrong with your post its not even funny.
#1 being that you dont know what an ice age is, the fact that we are currently IN an ice age and what an interglacial period is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Paragraph one. Start your education before making statements.
Seriously?
The previous record was from 60 years ago and the difference was 0.4 celcius.
Alarmist much.
Pens are not the majority and pens are not the one of the few stories of batteries blowing up. Its the mods with 18650s.
Residential rates /= commercial rates.
Also, people don't watch the spot price of electricity and wait for the dip to plug in their electric cars. Even IF they had access to the spot price.
Useless comment is useless. Lucky green eco activist mod points FTW I guess.
Your baseline was wrong, as was demonstrated to you.
Why would he use your baseline then?
This is hilarious. I'll just sit back and have some popcorn!
Did I say any of those things? Or do you just like to make up stories in your head and pretend others believe in them?
I called someone out on vehicle specs, full stop.
I posted the links to the specs, which contained the right Curb Weights for comparison.
Taurus : 3969 lbs (SE, smallest version for 2016)
Tesla : 4647 lbs (s-70, smallest version for 2016)
Now, if you want to cheat and use the curb weight of a Taurus SHO AWD V6 Twin Turbo. Then by all means, you win, I guess....
p.s. Also, There is no S-60 model for Tesla in 2016...
So your screen cap shows the Tesla is a smaller car.
What is your point again?
7" isn't negligible on a vehicle.
Indeed, it reads like all current climate change research. Full of "Could" "May" "Can" instead of actual observations and facts.
Lies to prove your point, or just ignorance?
Taurus is a much bigger car than the Tesla for starters. And the S-60 has very low autonomy, but lets go with it.
Taurus specs: http://www.edmunds.com/ford/ta...
Tesla specs: http://www.edmunds.com/tesla/m...
The Tesla is 700lbs heavier than one of the heaviest sedans you could find for your comparison AND its a smaller car.
If you want to call bullshit, makes sure you smell your reply first.
In this new world, where there is a vendetta against all human beings by way of climate change alarmism, quality of life is not a consideration.
When discussing CO2 all the negatives are quantified, but the positives seem to never make the cut.
Cheap energy is the #1 reason for modern society, quality of life, pursuit of leisure activities, medical break throughs, higher education available to the masses, life expectancy, etc.
But all of that, is unimportant.
His question was quite simple and clear and included the answer to your question "Estimates of "what"?"
Since you did not realise that the question contains the "what", you clearly have proven his point.
And the free money given to government friends in your 2nd point is ok with you?
Solyndra ring a bell?
Last year the east coast all the way up to Canada has unusual cold for pretty much the whole winter.
Started early in November and ended in late March.
It was steady -20C for weeks on end overall probably months.
Were as this year (here in Montreal) we have had 4 days in the last week of -20 and the rest of the winter has been pretty mild.
Its par for the course with El Nino years though. Nothing much to see. It'll be very cold next year, it being a La Nina year, but then, the peanut gallery will be quite about that.
Say what?
It is unfortunate that seemingly educated and smart people would believe such a subject is a yes / no question.
That you would reduce the whole of climate science importance down to a yes / no question, just shows how much the media have managed to educate so many into thinking it is so simple.
I am at a loss of words to express how wrong your perception of the subject is.
Exactly my point.
And you equating evolution and the Earths orbit with climate science, as it pertains to how "settled" those sciences are, is disingenuous.