Great. Cite the peer reviewed studies they have released.Zeets2 » 04 May 2021, 1:51 pm » wrote: ↑
And neither is the Friends of Science, which is a non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals. We have assembled a Scientific Advisory Board of esteemed climate scientists from around the world to offer a critical mass of current science on global climate and climate change to policy makers, as well as any other interested parties. We also do extensive literature research on these scientific subjects. Concerned about the abuse of science displayed in the politically inspired Kyoto protocol, we offer critical evidence that challenges the premises of Kyoto and present alternative causes of climate change.
But I get it. You've gone out so far on that limb that there's no returning to reality when you get your nose rubbed in it like I just did.
Fortunately for you, there's no law against choosing to remain ignorant. Had there been, you'd be facing a life sentence.
I've done enough of your errands proving your ignorance on the subject. Before I do more, YOU show me photos of the rising sea levels that you idiots have been promising for the past 40 years, as I asked for! THEN I'll get you the peer reviewed studies you requested, and when I do, you STILL will be too stubborn to admit how little you know!
Zeets2 » 04 May 2021, 2:01 pm » wrote: ↑
There's PLENTY, fool! So where are the pictures I demanded to see? And what "PR group" has over 900 scientists and professionals contributing to their scientific data? You DO NOT get to dismiss a non-government institute with such extensive credentials simply because it proves you're a liar!
Typical IGNORANT BRAINWASHED MORON ZEETS. Repeating the PR campaign and IGNORING THE SCIENCE. Its a SCIENCE issue so NATURALLY he is regurgitating what he was TOLD to think by a PR CAMPAIGN by industry and rightwing screechmonkeys and IGNORING THE UNDENIABLE scientific CONSENSUS by SCIENCE
Zeets2 » 04 May 2021, 2:48 pm » wrote: ↑
So stop your whining and admit you're nothing but a gullible 21st century Chicken Little who believes the sky is falling.
And here's one of those PEER REVIEWD STUDIES you ALSO are so damn **** don't exist:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/1 ... 0612463317
Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies (see link above). By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.
The survey results show geoscientists and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists (summarized here and here) revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims.
According to the newly published survey of geoscientists and engineers, merely 36 percent of respondents fit the “Comply with Kyoto” model. The scientists in this group “express the strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause.”
Oh, you're not happy with just one peer-reviewed story as you first claimed? Now that you see it, you want to discard it because there is only a reference to the study WHERE THEY STATED THAT SAME EVIDENCE?
Boy, was THAT tough! But it certainly is worth losing 5 seconds of my life to prove once again how you know NOTHING about the subject!http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... tists.html
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them
Popular Technology Tuesday, May 21, 2013
There are other qualified reports providing the same evidence that the AGW theory is bogus, and I WILL be happy to continue this, but I realize there is only so much humiliation a gullible liberal like you needs to endure.NASA Fights To Keep Debunked 97% Climate-Consensus Claim On Website
Climate Change Dispatch WRITTEN BY VALERIE RICHARDSON ON APR 15, 2020. LATEST NEWS
https://climatechangedispatch.com/nasa- ... m-website/
You have not posted one from a scientific agencyZeets2 » 04 May 2021, 6:55 pm » wrote: ↑
OK, dickhead! Then I guess I'll have to spend another 5 seconds online linking ANOTHER peer-reviewed paper that determines AGW is a hoax.
Yup! No problem, here it is:
Boy, was THAT tough! But it certainly is worth losing 5 seconds of my life to prove once again how you know NOTHING about the subject!
Now here's a bonus of the studies exposing the often-repeated claim of a "97% consensus of scientists". That too is total ****, but it does add some additional insight on what a poor job of research you've done on the subject yourself, and once again, how truly gullible a liberal you are:
There are other qualified reports providing the same evidence that the AGW theory is bogus, and I WILL be happy to continue this, but I realize there is only so much humiliation a gullible liberal like you needs to endure.
****! You demanded one, and I gave you three of them in addition to peer-reviewed papers besides, PROVING what a farce you believe in! The Climate Intelligence Foundation, Popular Technology, and Climate Change Dispatch are ALL scientific agencies that have studied the global warming hoax in detail. You simply don't like their conclusions because they fly in the face of your phony religious beliefs that you swallow because you're a gullible fool! And it's clear nothing will be sufficient to convince you otherwise, not even when ANOTHER round of leftist predictions fail to come true again in the next 10-12 years when the world is supposed to end as you idiots claim!
Dude I gave you the science on sea level rise. No one disputes this....even those that dispute AGW. Pictures? LolZeets2 » 05 May 2021, 8:19 am » wrote: ↑
So where are my pictures that I demanded?
What's wrong? Can't find even ONE to dispute this picture:
You mean you can't even find one from the last 50 years of global warming?!??
Where's the "rising sea levels" that were going to wash away every coastal city over the past 20+ years?
How come most species on earth didn't die by 1995 as was predicted?
Where's the massive world famine that was going to hit us by 1975?
Where's that great "cloud of blue steam" that was going to envelope us by 1989 as the NY Times claimed?
Where's the food and water rationing that we were supposed to be facing in 1980?
Where's that "new ice age" that was going to result by this year because of our continuing to burn fossil fuels?
How come I was still able to drive down NY's West Side Highway last week when it was supposed to be underwater two years ago?
Why did I need to buy a new snow blower this past winter when snowfall was supposed to be a "thing of the past" by the year 2000?
How come the Arctic polar ice cap is still there, when Gore promised it would disappear by 2013?
Where's that great "Eco-catastrophe" that global warming guru Paul Ehrlich promised in a 1969 essay that would hit us by 1975?
How come we didn't run out of fossil fuels by the year 2000, and we now have enough in the US to become oil and gas EXPORTERS?
Why do our rain forests still exist unchanged when 90% of them were supposed to be gone by 2005?
And the toughest question of all, HOW CAN LIBERALS LIKE YOU STILL BE SUCH GULLIBLE FOOLS TO CONTINUE TO BELIEVE ALL THAT ****, AND MAKE THE SAME PHONY PREDICTIONS FOR THE NEXT 50 YEARS OR MORE?
THAT'S the question I'd really like to hear dopes like you answer, and finally expose your ignorance once and for all!
And until you do, go peddle your **** elsewhere, sonny! Anyone still believing as you do has proven you can't be taken seriously, and I've already devoted more time rubbing your nose in it than you deserve!
Got that, princess?
I gave you THREE scientific agencies denying AGW. If you don't agree with them, you're certainly free to go **** yourself.
No you have yet to give a single one that produces peer reviewed research.Zeets2 » 05 May 2021, 10:57 am » wrote: ↑
And yeah, I'm waiting for you to show me ONE PICTURE that proves that rising sea levels have wiped out a single coastal city as you idiots predicted!
Anywhere in the world.
****, I gave you TWO peer reviewed research papers. Show me how it is that they're not credible!
08/26/2013 08:09 am ET Updated Dec 06, 2017
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/global-w ... _n_3799019
14 U.S. Cities That Could Disappear Over The Next Century, Thanks To Global Warming
There is really no way around it: Thanks to climate change, sea levels are rising. A huge question on the minds of many is, what does this mean for America? Will sea walls and city planning protect major metropolises, or are we bound to lose some national gems? Unfortunately, the latter is a significant possibility. Read on for 14 U.S. cities that could be devastated over the next century due to rising tides.
Here's the whole story:Did UN Official Say Nations Would Vanish If Global Warming Not Reversed by 2000?
Alex Kasprak Published 20 September 2019
In 1989, a senior U.N. environmental official said, “Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”
The senior U.N. official speaking to the Associated Press was Noel Brown, who served as a regional director of the United Nations Environment Program
The Global Warming Apocalypses That Didn’t Happen
The reason we have a global warming crisis is because crisis sells.
APRIL 21, 2014
This article appeared on The Washington Times on April 21, 2014.
“The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard‐of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.” — from an Associated Press report published in The Washington Post on Nov. 2, 1922.You may have noticed that the predicted disaster 92 years ago did not happen, nor have other predicted catastrophes from the global‐warming crowd.On July 5, 1989, Noel Brown, then the director of the New York office of the United Nations Environment Program, warned of a “10‐year window of opportunity to solve” global warming “entire nations could be wiped off the face of Earth by rising sea levels if the global‐warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco‐refugees,’ threatening political chaos.” The U.N.-forecast disaster never occurred. However, thanks must be given to Mother Nature for the unexpected 17‐year pause in global warming rather than the actions of mankind, which have continued to spew out carbon dioxide at record levels. This little error has not stopped the doomsayers at the U.N.
They did not come from a scientific agency. I also do not care about predictions that do not come from a scientific agency.Zeets2 » 05 May 2021, 11:45 am » wrote: ↑
And FIND ME THOSE PICTURES OF CITIES UNDERWATER!
And NOBODY gives a **** what YOU predict! Global warming EXPERTS have predicted that cities worldwide would be underwater caused by rising sea levels brought about by global warming.
So what's the problem? Is that belief too radical for even YOU to accept? Why do you believe all their other failed predictions, but not that one?
Read these and educate your dumb self:
Here's the whole story:
Nice little scam ya got going. Make outrageous scary predictions based on observations. Take in billions using the scary predictions, calling any that don't believe the scary predictions deniers of science. When the scary predictions fail to materialize the goal posts are moved, the scary predictions become more dire, just at an ever later date. No accountability when the predictions fail. Pretty slick.Vegasgiants » 05 May 2021, 11:52 am » wrote: ↑
Show me when NASA, noaa or some other reputable science agency predicted that
This is what they say. Deny that
Sorry, I'm done providing proof of the stupidity you believe so strongly in. Fools like YOU want us to believe the latest predictions of your so-called "experts" now, after EVERY ONE OF THEIR PREDICTIONS FAILED FOR THE PAST FIFTY YEARS!Vegasgiants » 05 May 2021, 11:52 am » wrote: ↑
Show me when NASA, noaa or some other reputable science agency predicted that
This is what they say. Deny that
Of course, it's sufficient to convince dopes like Biden and Kamala, as well as virtually every liberal moron here!Neo » 05 May 2021, 11:58 am » wrote: ↑
It's like a cult. When their leader doesn't rise from the grave or the world doesn't end they simply move the date and call unbelievers heretics. Oldest game in the book.
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Guess what I think?reproductions were eternally separated before reality and will be after humanity is gone from the intellectual theaters of institutional doubt commanding everyone treat life as upon a world stage of anything else is possible. thanks Shakespeare.
Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], Annoyed Liberall, Arris, Benson13, Bidennextpresident, Blutarski, Buffalo, Cannonpointer, ConsRule, Crazytrain, crimsongulf, Famagusta, FOS, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, Hank, Ike Bana, Jantje_Smit, nefarious101, neue regel, omh, PaperLi [Bot], Polar1ty, PoliticalPopUp, Semrush [Bot], SJConspirator, sooted up Cyndi, Steve Jobs [Bot], Taipan, Twitter [Bot], Vegas, Vegas giants, Yahoo [Bot], Zeets2 and 575 guests