01 Dec 18
@metal-brain saidThe scientific community do not take votes.
Remind us all of what percentage of climate scientists were sent e-mails, what percentage responded and how they conducted their e-mail search.
There are polls and there are real polls. You would think an alleged billion dollar problem would demand a proper poll.
e-mails? Please....you have heard of a spam folder, right?
Funny how government can afford to fund climate scientists but not a decent poll to know a proper consensus of them.
Views on global warming are the culmination of thousands of peer
reviewed papers, experimentation, discoveries etc. These views are
discussed in various universities and international societies ..
a consensus is usually reached. The consensus on global warming
was reached years ago.
01 Dec 18
@metal-brain saidDipstick.
Ice sheets don't float. Sea ice floats.
https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/science/is-this-a-verifiable-claim.177012/page-19
01 Dec 18
@wolfgang59 saidThere have been people who have allegedly determined what a climate scientist's view is by reading his study/article only for many climate scientists to refute that determination.
The scientific community do not take votes.
Views on global warming are the culmination of thousands of peer
reviewed papers, experimentation, discoveries etc. These views are
discussed in various universities and international societies ..
a consensus is usually reached. The consensus on global warming
was reached years ago.
It is clear that alarmists are making these determinations with bias much like Samuel George Morton did by selectively reported data, manipulated sample compositions, made analytical errors, and mismeasured skulls in order to support his prejudicial views on intelligence differences between different populations. All of that was likely because of an unconscious bias.
Alarmists clearly do the same thing, so you are just plain wrong. Your unconscious bias is showing as well. You probably made all of that up.
What experimentation? Be specific.
What discoveries? Be specific.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_George_Morton
01 Dec 18
@wolfgang59 saidExample?
We do.
And there is no need to poll all climate scientists.
You think when there is consensus among a population each one has to have a vote?
01 Dec 18
@wolfgang59 saidWrong input, wrong output.
A guess?
Don't be ridiculous, they are based on physical processes.
Climate modellers (I don't call them climate scientists because they are not all climate scientists) have to input numbers. They don't all put in the same numbers. That is because they don't agree on those numbers. That is why the different models don't agree with each other predicting the same thing.
They are all guessing. They are based on guessing.
01 Dec 18
Climate scientists have said the White House’s National Climate Assessment (NCA) resembles pseudoscience more than actual science.
The Missing Science from the Draft
National Assessment on Climate Change
https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/the-missing-science-of-draft-assessment.pdf
01 Dec 18
@Metal-Brain
Cato, very right wing politics so they would say global warming is a myth or a hoax like Trump.
01 Dec 18
@sonhouse saidThey are climate scientists. They know global warming is not a hoax just as I do. Why don't you read what they wrote before rejecting their evaluation? Isn't that logical?
@Metal-Brain
Cato, very right wing politics so they would say global warming is a myth or a hoax like Trump.
What do you suggest?
Should they be banned from being heard? That is truthfully what you would like , isn't it? Admit it.
You are illogical. You refuse to read any of it and have already rejected it. I already proved the hurricane claims are myths. Are you afraid you will read about a lot more myths than that and it will make perfect sense?
03 Dec 18
@shavixmir saidWe already know the earth is warming. Nobody disputes that.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46384067
This pretty much sums it up.
It started from natural causes and it is still mostly natural causes.
I noticed your link omitted the antarctic ice.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses
03 Dec 18
@metal-brain saidIt does show the ice. It’s getting less.
We already know the earth is warming. Nobody disputes that.
It started from natural causes and it is still mostly natural causes.
I noticed your link omitted the antarctic ice.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses
03 Dec 18
1 edit
@shavixmir saidYes, we know ice is melting. That is what happens in a warming trend. We can see it in sea level rise, but it is not alarming. Arctic ice is melting and antarctic ice is gaining more than losses. It is what you would expect.
It does show the ice. It’s getting less.
http://www.psmsl.org/products/reconstructions/2008GL033611.pdf