Search results

if it's what you call a climate expert and a scientific sourcing, that explains a lot lol

you continue on throwing insults, and trying to make a demonstration with flawed arguments (and demonstrated as such by science) when i already told you that i make my opinion reading science, not the insulting babbles of some guy on a forum. I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree, because...

Sorry but you are the one again denying facts, when you can't accept a fact your ony answer is insults (to me and scientists). CO2 warming properties have been established long before science realized it could cause a problem to climate (wow what a conspiracy that could make "fake facts" even...

again some graphs from who knows where from someone obviously not understanding how science work are not proving anything compared to the mountain of evidences of the scientific community It has been proven that the natural drivers of warming are not responsible of the observed warming, and you...

The thing is we are in a mass extinction happening, just open your eyes. nearly 26 000 species are in danger, and populations of vertebrates have diminished by 60% in the last 50 years......and that does not even account for al the species disappearing even before being known by science. And...

and i'd love to see where in the scientific litterature someone stated that Forida should be over water by now. Again that was probably something misquoted by media or politicians, what they say whatever side they are is rarely scientifically sound.

It's funny people can accuse science to be a religious dogma, and then are jumping as soon as they can on some discrepency in the predictions (predictions that in no way refute the observed warming, predictions are juste about the future) to dismiss all the body of evidence on climate. while...

funny we are always accused of being in a "leftist conspiracy", when science denial is not at all restricted to right wing, science denial about GMO or Vaccine safety is mosty from left people. What shows it's not sicence which is biased, but people who are unable to accept the inconvenient...

the worst is that as Mr Frary said, they are not in bad situation now compared to a lot a developed economies, AND they are indeed a leader in the new green technologies AND one of the few countries having had a actual decrease of CO2 emissions. So their claim that it would destroy US economy is...

oh sure, an interview on Fox News, of a scientist funded by oil industry (and who lied about it) and known record of being wrong, is surely a reliable source to get THE truth....talk about being brainwashed lol https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Patrick_J._Michaels_-_funding...

wow, what reasoned, mature and scientific retort, i'm impressed. You did not only missed science lessons i see

Calling the results of science garbage, false science, a leftist religion (as if researchers were all leaning left or were all atheists, what is obviously false), not mentioning the fact that comparing science with a reigion is a complete non sense given what and how science study things, or...

I woud add that it is quite strange/illogical to think that the very science/scientists who determined and quantified the role of these natural drivers of climate to explain past changes would not take into account or analyse those factors to determine what causes the changes now. Actually they...

Well again this claim is not supported by science findings, sun variations cannot account for the current changes, scientists checked this. The fact that climate has changed in the past does not refute the fact that humans are causing the changes observed now, because the natural drivers of...

and your graph about radiosondes temperatures is just another (no actually 2) of cherry picking , i'm not saying the method itself is bad 1) why no data after 2002 and before 1958? as far as i know we are in 2018 and industrial revolution started during the 19th century, so you don't show the...

the answers you made just show again that you are the one not understanding anything 1) where did i said plants released co2? i stated the reverse, so you don't even read well 2) what is the statement about flowering plant supposed to mean? do you think there was no plants or photosynthesis...

what just shows again that weather and climate are different things, and that a local personal experience is hardly a reliable evidence of a global trend https://www.noaa.gov/news/noaa-2017-was-3rd-warmest-year-on-record-for-globe

How to mislead people : conveniently choose a graph with the x axis in the middle of the figure what gives a false impression of stability, and use on the right a single value ( note that this value is a difference with the average temps between 81-2001 not a absoute value of increase since the...

the critical thing being that those past changes happened over vastly longer periods of time compared to the rate of change we are seeing now, which doesn't allow for adaptation of the biosphere.

precision about my comments on past CO2, i admit my answer is a bit of topic as it adresses the initial drop of CO2 in atmosphere, BUT even if a life filled earth happened with higher co2 levels during prehistoric times, you cannot compare it with the present situation, first it's not really the...

for the observed increase greenhouse effect observed by satellites (again you should provide complete source rather than a graph of unknown origin) https://www.nature.com/articles/35066553 "you have no idea what your talking about" seem to be your only argument line (without giving evidence of...

There is a little problem with your EPA report (which is public so anybody can verify what i'm saying here) : 1) the graph you showed formerly doesn't appear in it (there are similar graphs but the one you showed had been obviously edited and retitled from a graph of the actual report) 2) this...

i let people decide if they choose to read the link i put who is really denying or doing pseudo science . But i don't really feel i'm the one denying the scientific consensus or implying more or less implicitly that scientists are all dumb or dishonest (with no evidences).... and again your...