Global warming propaganda: omitting debates

@metal-brain said
You didn't ask that. How many times are you going to attempt to move the goal post?
I have never attempted to confine you to recent peer reviewed articles, yet you tried to impose it on me. Accepting such an unreasonable criteria would make finding them very time consuming. I must insist you hold yourself to the same standards as you expect from others.
I have never ask ...[text shortened]... that is said to be peer reviewed and can't see any critique of the article. Where do you find that?

Selecting literature that supports your position is not proof. I can do the same thing.

@kazetnagorra said
The goal post has stood steadfast at this claim of yours:

Selecting literature that supports your position is not proof. I can do the same thing.

Yet you have not selected any literature to support your position.

@metal-brain said
I have already posted plenty of Singer's articles. Here is the same link I have posted for you before.

https://www.americanthinker.com/author/s_fred_singer/

Now answer my questions. You have been ignoring them.

@kazetnagorra said
I looked up the first article from the list you gave on the previous page. The first one on the list is an article in Nature... however, it is not authored by Fred Singer.

Looks like you got bamboozled a bit there, I'm afraid.

@metal-brain said
Really? Can you post the nature link?

@metal-brain said
Really? Can you post the nature link?

@kazetnagorra said
Here is a link to the article. It's paywalled of course, but you can see who the authors are.

https://www.nature.com/articles/384522b0

@metal-brain said
That is not the first article listed like you claimed. Is it even on the list?

@Metal-Brain

See the first animated chart here, it is very persuasive ideed if you think about what it is showing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-5aceb360-8bc3-4741-99f0-2e4f76ca02bb

@metal-brain said
It debunks the perception of cause and effect that most people believe. Most people think the ice core samples prove CO2 caused warming in the past. It does not. This proves that even if there is anthropogenic warming you cannot be certain CO2 is the main cause of that AGW. It could be methane for all you know.
Saying it is both is an easy conclusion to make, but how mu ...[text shortened]... d guests on the program trashing string theory that are not even physicists.


Same thing, right?

@metal-brain said
"I suggest you look at the stuff I was saying about astronomical forcing in one of the other threads on this issue."

Your source was full of unintelligible jargon. Here is an excerpt from the link below:

"A lot of people tend to use complicated vocabulary and jargon to mask when they don’t understand something. The problem is we only fool ourselves because we don’t ...[text shortened]... .com/explore/item/the-feynman-technique-the-best-way-to-learn-anything

Use the Feynman technique.

@deepthought said
My source was a scientific paper intended for a technical audience. If you are unable to interpret scientific articles about this subject then you are not in a position to independently criticize them. You cannot rely on Feynman to get you off the hook here, his comments were audience specific, meaning that an article or talk written for a particular audience ought to c ...[text shortened]... evant to an argument simply because you do not understand all the scientific terms being used in it.

@deepthought said
Do you have any evidence that most people believe that ice core samples prove that carbon dioxide caused warming in the past?

@metal-brain said
HA!

You don't even know what the article is saying! FAIL!

@kazetnagorra said
Top of the list in the URL you posted on 02 Jan '19 18:12.