Not GOP
Well-Known Member
The level of ignorance I'm seeing from you liberals is through the roof tonight.
The $100k Global Warming Challenge
- Thread starter heckler73
- Start date
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
Hahahaha you don't even know the term backpedaling? Trying to push your defects on me as a mean of protecting yourself? I think so Mr. Dropped on his head.
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
The stupidity that's coming from you is astounding.
Not GOP
Well-Known Member
That is NOT what backpedaling means. God damn it! Where is your IQ at? Around 80? I just can't do it anymore. It's not going to work until you're smart enough to figure out how big of a dunce you are.
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
Lol you have no clue what you're even talking about anymore nimrod. Go back to 3rd grade where throwing a tantrum might get you somewhere. Yes, you were backpedaling or pack pedaling like you said.
Bugeye
Well-Known Member
Guess you didn't even bother to read the index on page 2 of WG1 report. LOL
Not GOP
Well-Known Member
Let's take a look and see how remedial you are so far.It doesn't get much dumber than this:
backpedaling- "Trying to push your defect on me as a mean of protecting yourself"
Muslim is another word for Arabic race
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
Your ability to connect the dots is profoundly stupid. I never maintained either of those lol. You obviously can't discern that sentences can be independent clauses. You really can't be that stupid can you? And I maintained that's probably what you thought and looking through your posts you usually use Arabs and Muslims interchangeably until someone calls you on it. Then you backpedal and go "I never meant that."Let's take a look and see how remedial you are so far.It doesn't get much dumber than this:
backpedaling- "Trying to push your defect on me as a mean of protecting yourself"
Muslim is another word for Arabic race
bravedave
Well-Known Member
Not GOP
Well-Known Member
The sun's activity (temperature) is without a doubt, by far the largest contributing factor. Liberals are backpedaling now. They claim that the increase of carbon in the atmosphere will offset cooling caused by decreased activity in the sun.
So what I want to know is, are increased co2 levels a good thing, or a bad thing?“If things played out as described in Zharkova's paper, and we did see a decrease in solar output roughly as happened in the 1700s, there would be some cooling for 20 or 30 years,” according to Renwick. “But the levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases are so much higher now (and will be even higher in 2030) that temperatures would not drop much below where they are today. And that drop would last only until 2050 or so. Then we'd have a bounce upwards again.”
- Renwick
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
It says it's been a smaller increase than is suggested by some, but it's still an increase...
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
why did you edit out the part where i correctly labeled you as a massive idiot?
even your fellow republicans think you are a massive idiot. so own it, sistah.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
so if burning fossil fuels cools the planet, what do you think is causing the warming?
gay liberal marxists?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
did you really just cite the most prominent science denier website in existence?
no wonder you think the word "hiatus" appears in IPCC reports, rather than fox news headlines.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
try again, chumlee.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2010/20100601_TemperaturePaper.pdf
2010: hottest year ever despite solar activity at record low
Bugeye
Well-Known Member
The stupid runs deep in you. I told you to look in Ch. 9 of WG1 of the IPCC AR5. Here's a snippet from p. 769:
Box 9.2 | Climate Models and the Hiatus in Global Mean Surface Warming of the Past 15 Years
The observed global mean surface temperature (GMST) has shown a much smaller increasing linear trend over the past 15 years than over the past 30 to 60 years (Section 2.4.3, Figure 2.20, Table 2.7; Figure 9.8; Box 9.2 Figure 1a, c). Depending on the observational data set, the GMST trend over 1998–2012 is estimated to be around one-third to one-half of the trend over 1951–2012 (Section 2.4.3, Table 2.7; Box 9.2 Figure 1a, c). For example, in HadCRUT4 the trend is 0.04ºC per decade over 1998–2012, compared to 0.11ºC per decade over 1951–2012. The reduction in observed GMST trend is most marked in Northern Hemisphere winter (Section 2.4.3; Cohen et al., 2012). Even with this “hiatus” in GMST trend, the decade of the 2000s has been the warmest in the instrumental record of GMST (Section 2.4.3, Figure 2.19). Nevertheless, the occurrence of the hiatus in GMST trend during the past 15 years raises the two related questions of what has caused it and whether climate models are able to reproduce it.
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
notice how they put hiatus in quotes to signal dubiousness?
those are called scare quotes or sneer quotes. this should be obvious by the way they noted an "increasing linear trend" as well as the fact that "the decade of the 2000s has been the warmest in the instrumental record of GMST".
but i guess you are too stupid to notice that they are mocking people like you.
or, to put it another way, you are too "special" and "smart" to let standard english language conventions get in the way of your "totally intelligent analysis".
LOL
bravedave
Well-Known Member
Ok Buck. You made me laugh. Close too. Its actually,
Green, libertarian,martians.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
what do you think happens when you extract tens of millions of years worth of fossil fuels, and over the course of a century, burn them all, thereby releasing carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas which causes warming, into the air?