The Environment

[ZRod]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Well...there you go.  Now we know the truth.

 

 

So the Dems are God?

[ZRod]

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

Richard Lindzen is a long-time climate denier who has been refuted many times over the years. His own colleagues at MIT refute his stance:

http://climate-science.mit.edu/mit/paoc-faculty-fact-check-mit-colleague-on-climate-science

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06032017/climate-change-denial-scientists-richard-lindzen-mit-donald-trump/

 

But if you read his argument he's saying that because there is so little CO2 in the atmosphere it cannot cause large changes in warming. It's a logical fallacy that small inputs cannot lead to large outputs. It's like arguing that small amounts of cyanide in water can't kill a person because there's just so much water. However, cyanide can be toxic at 0.5 mg/L (0.00005%) and lethal above 3 mg/L (0.0003%) (link).

He's not a climate change denier, but he is highly contrarian to the establishment. His theories are grounded in science, but as you mentioned many of his hypothesis have been refuted by fellow academics and scientist.

[RedDenver]

22 hours ago, ZRod said:

He's not a climate change denier, but he is highly contrarian to the establishment. His theories are grounded in science, but as you mentioned many of his hypothesis have been refuted by fellow academics and scientist.

Here's a website that put together a chart with Lindzen's claims and links to them being debunked: https://skepticalscience.com/skeptic_Richard_Lindzen.htm

 

He's been saying there's no global warming or that the warming won't continue since the 80's and been wrong many times over (he predicted the peak had been hit in 1998, then 2003, then 2007, then 2010). That seems like climate denying to me.

[Archy1221]

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

14 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

 

I think nothing is more hilarious than conservative denial when it comes to science that contradicts them. 

[Scarlet]

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

 

You've really jumped the shark when you're posting links to the Daily Sceptic.

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-sceptic-bias/

 

Quote

Overall, we rate the Daily Sceptic a far-right biased quackery level pseudoscience website that frequently publishes false and misleading information regarding covid-19 and science in general.

Quackery indeed.  Which makes one wonder what's the motivation for posting garbage like this.  I suspect it's just trolling at this point.  

[Archy1221]

Just now, Scarlet said:

You've really jumped the shark when you're posting links to the Daily Sceptic.

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-sceptic-bias/

 

Quackery indeed.  Which makes one wonder what's the motivation for posting garbage like this.  I suspect it's just trolling at this point.  

Do you have a problem with the data or just the website?   I didn’t see you dispute anything within the article soooooo

[funhusker]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

Do you have a problem with the data or just the website?   I didn’t see you dispute anything within the article soooooo

Umm, yes the problem with the data is that isn’t accurate…

[Scarlet]

Both.  It's garbage.  Soooooo

 

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7109102/has-there-really-been-no-warming-of-the-planet-in-22-years/

 

Quote

AAP FactCheck found Mr Dean's statement that data showed there had been no net warming in the past 22 years to be false.

 

While one set of satellite data he cited showed similar global temperatures in 1998 and 2020, the same figures showed a clear rising trend throughout this period. Experts said comparing two years in isolation misrepresented the data as climate change analyses were based on longer-term patterns.

 

In addition, 1998 represented a major El Nio event and a record temperature at the time. Despite this, surface temperature and other satellite data, which experts say most accurately represent the global climate, show 2020 was significantly hotter following a period of pronounced warming.

 

False - The checkable claim is false.

 

[funhusker]

I’m going with NatGeo

 

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/how-climate-models-got-so-accurate-they-earned-a-nobel-prize#:~:text=Modelers agree%2C and note that,predictions of global temperature increases.

 

[commando]

5 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

 

the text of the tweet talks about the last 40 years data....but the graph only shows the last 7 years.

 

i think i found the graph showing more than the last 40 years...and it seems to show to me that the temps have been increasing

 

[RedDenver]

We all know Archy bases his reasoning in facts and evidence and not at all towing a party line, so I'm sure he'll now acknowledge that warming is clearly seen in the data.

[ZRod]

Trends show that the economy has not grown over the last 40 years, as I only show you data from 2009 and 2020. 

[Archy1221]

11 hours ago, ZRod said:

Trends show that the economy has not grown over the last 40 years, as I only show you data from 2009 and 2020. 

That would almost be funny if you were accurate

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/188105/annual-gdp-of-the-united-states-since-1990/

[commando]

12 hours ago, ZRod said:

Trends show that the economy has not grown over the last 40 years, as I only show you data from 2009 and 2020. 

mocking apparently goes over someones head.