The Global Warmists' Last Line Of Defense: The Warming Must Be In The Bermuda Triangle

Apr 27, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Heartland Institute

Global warming activists have finally come up with a last line of defense they know nobody will able to prove wrong: The missing global warming is in the Bermuda Triangle.

Comments
41 - 49 of 49 Comments Last updated May 3, 2013
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
May 2, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Himself wrote:
My point, Einstein's actually, was that consensus can be proven wrong by one person.
Himself wrote:
But for you to say that I should provide that "one person" shows just how little you think of the scientific process.
Make yer mind up.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
May 2, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Himself wrote:
My point, Einstein's actually, was that consensus can be proven wrong by one person.
Himself wrote:
However, there are many scientists who do not believe that a conclusion can be reached yet.
Not being able to produce one scientist who can disprove the consensus, you claim there are "many" who would contest it.

As Einstein said, if the theory was wrong, one would be enough.
Dont drink the koolaid

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
May 2, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
toxic topix AGW deniers love to read the first page of their 5th grade science books, to demean science & mathematics. Because toxic topix AGW deniers couldn't understand anything after the first page, they could pursue science further. Yeah, no science, chemistry, astronomy, physics, algebra or pre-calc were earned for their poorly earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas. Of course, very very few toxic topix AGW deniers have science or mathematics degrees.
Alcohol is not for every one.
Himself

Oceanside, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
May 3, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Not being able to produce one scientist who can disprove the consensus, you claim there are "many" who would contest it.
As Einstein said, if the theory was wrong, one would be enough.
One does not disprove consensus. One can disprove a hypothesis or a theory that creates a level of consensus. The way you use the word consensus shows that you either do not understand the scientific method, or you do not care. Probably the latter. For anybody to disprove something, someone else must first show convincing evidence that they have PROVEN it. Your consensus hasn't. Example, now that there is unexplained cooling, the consensus' search for answers at the bottom of the ocean begins! I don't recall anybody talking about heat being stored in the oceans until after the unexplained cooling was finally accepted. Previously, I couldn't have a short summer heat wave where I live without hearing about global warming! I'm not saying they shouldn't look in the oceans, but it certainly severely weakens the argument that your consensus is defending anything that they have scientifically "proven". Now they're looking for the "missing" heat! The same heat "the consensus" has been projecting for decades.

Your argument presumes that AGW has already reached the level of scientific THEORY that must be disproven. It has not. It is a hypothesis, at best, hence the level of skepticism at all levels of expertise.

The only purpose for my Einstein quote was to illustrate that consensus only is what it is. By itself, it is not the end of discussion.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
May 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Himself wrote:
I don't recall anybody talking about heat being stored in the oceans until after the unexplained cooling was finally accepted.
This just shows you weren't paying attention.

http://www.topix.com/forum/health/T9BQRV6LMIG...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
May 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
One does not disprove consensus. One can disprove a hypothesis or a theory that creates a level of consensus.
OK then pedant.

Post one scientist who can provide evidence that the scientific consensus that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will cause the planet to warm is wrong.

He or she will have to overturn basic physics, laboratory experiments and observations dating back 60 years or more.
Boom shocka locka

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
May 3, 2013
 
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
An open mind is not what's needed when looking at misinformation from Heartland.
What's needed is some scepticism.
The consensus arises from the weight of the evidence, looked at by people who understand it, which is why ever scientific academy has said that warming is real and we are responsible- hardly hysteria.
Global warming made Al Gore cheat on his wife also. Hardly hysteria.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
May 3, 2013
 
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
This just shows you weren't paying attention.
http://www.topix.com/forum/health/T9BQRV6LMIG...
Climategate and "missing heat" email: November 2009.

Scientist talking about heat being stored in the ocean: September 2009.

If only being proved obviously and demonstrably wrong would ever make a denier go away and shut up...
Fun Facts

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
May 3, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Himself wrote:
<quoted text>
One does not disprove consensus. One can disprove a hypothesis or a theory that creates a level of consensus. The way you use the word consensus shows that you either do not understand the scientific method, or you do not care. Probably the latter. For anybody to disprove something, someone else must first show convincing evidence that they have PROVEN it. Your consensus hasn't. Example, now that there is unexplained cooling, the consensus' search for answers at the bottom of the ocean begins! I don't recall anybody talking about heat being stored in the oceans until after the unexplained cooling was finally accepted. Previously, I couldn't have a short summer heat wave where I live without hearing about global warming! I'm not saying they shouldn't look in the oceans, but it certainly severely weakens the argument that your consensus is defending anything that they have scientifically "proven". Now they're looking for the "missing" heat! The same heat "the consensus" has been projecting for decades.
Your argument presumes that AGW has already reached the level of scientific THEORY that must be disproven. It has not. It is a hypothesis, at best, hence the level of skepticism at all levels of expertise.
The only purpose for my Einstein quote was to illustrate that consensus only is what it is. By itself, it is not the end of discussion.
It is an hypothesis, at best. The equation doesn't work. The heat's missing. If you ask for the equation and just where the equation calculates the amount of heat energy stored in the ocean for how long, you won't get an answer. There is no answer. Or at least none of the proponents of AGW on these threads have an answer.

The oceans do absorb the heat energy from the sun. They distribute that energy throughout the system and that makes climate. There is a lag time between intake and distribution. Like all science there are varying estimates but the one I have seen more often is 10 years.

The ten year lag time is used by solar physicists who have made solar activity predictions and applied those to climate. Our sun went into a minimum phase after cycle 23.

The start of that mimimum phase was about 2002. The prediction I have seen most often is that the climate changes from the lower activity would become evident by 2012. Maybe they were off by a year. Don't know we'll see how the actual temperatures play out.

Climate is a million piece puzzle of which CO2 is a part. But to date we have very few of those puzzle pieces in place. It will take time for us to understand all of the pieces, put them where they belong in the process before we will be able to see the big picture.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

History in the News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
'Obama third term' label could hurt Hilary Clinton 8 hr WelbyMD 20
Will Al Sharpton become a thorn in Hillary Clin... Tue Cordwainer Trout 2
World War I: How did the unthinkable happen? Tue Vojvoda85m 14
On this Day: "In God We Trust" Becomes U.S. Motto (Jul '08) Aug 24 Kid_Tomorrow 12
Obama 'Worst President' Since WWII, Poll Finds Aug 24 Tuco Blondie 6
Vietnam asks US to lift arms ban Aug 22 BAC KY muon ngan ... 78
From prima signora to prima donna? Hillary Clin... Aug 20 Le Jimbo 14
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

History in the News People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••