What Is Climate Change?

[eyeball]

37 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right ... In science, consensus is irrelevant."

After all this time and with the level of science at hand, where is this individual, when will they  emerge with the evidence that proves there's no crisis?

Economically it would be like the 2nd coming of Christ in terms of saving us. And as always, there will be a Nobel...millions in cash...renamed high schools everywhere...Steven Tyler blushing at their mountain of panties.

Is this saviour among us now, even as we speak? 

 

[Goddess]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Is this saviour among us now, even as we speak? 

Well, you believe it's Fauci, so......

In 1931, 100 scientists got together and wrote a paper on how Einstein was wrong.

Ooopsy-doodle.

Science is not decided by voting.

Edited 22 hours ago by Goddess

[eyeball]

17 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Well, you believe it's Fauci, so......

Nope, but millions of you still know climate change isn't a crisis. How? Because the UN dialled back a couple of predictions?

17 minutes ago, Goddess said:

In 1931, 100 scientists got together and wrote a paper on how Einstein was wrong.

How's that worked out for them?

18 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Ooopsy-doodle.

Science is not decided by voting.

That's right.

[Goddess]

7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

That's right.

Thank you for finally seeing this point.

Previously, you've been a rabid proponent of "consensus science", often citing some generic "the vast majority of scientists say......"

Glad you're finally cluing in.

[Goddess]

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature - Astrophysics Data System

We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991-2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. 

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

After all this time and with the level of science at hand, where is this individual, when will they  emerge with the evidence that proves there's no crisis?

Economically it would be like the 2nd coming of Christ in terms of saving us. And as always, there will be a Nobel...millions in cash...renamed high schools everywhere...Steven Tyler blushing at their mountain of panties.

Is this saviour among us now, even as we speak? 

 

 

[Deluge]

Climate change is every bit as dangerous as the boogeyman. 

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Goddess said:

Previously, you've been a rabid proponent of "consensus science", often citing some generic "the vast majority of scientists say......"

Correct. You OTOH always interpreted or lied or spun...or whatever it is you do, into me concluding someone took a vote. That's nuts. 

I expect the vast majority will flip the other way if they're presented with evidence that proves AGW is scientifically incorrect and nullified.

But no one is going to hold an election over it...that's nuts.

It'll just be what it is.

Perhaps someone can make a prediction when that will be given how much is at stake - I'm a little surprised nothing seems to be moving the scientific consensus needle at all.

It's almost like a conspiracy or something.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Deluge said:

Climate change is every bit as dangerous as the boogeyman. 

Then why do the vast VAST majority of scientists say otherwise?

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Then why do the vast VAST majority of scientists say otherwise?

The vast majority say the climate is changing. So what? It does that, you can come out from under your bed now.

They also say things in this article. 

https://clintel.org/

And this one.

"More than 30,000 scientists have signed on to a paper saying that we're not facing a climate emergency."

https://www.newsweek.com/yes-climate-changing-no-its-not-emergency-opinion-1615632

And this one.

"There's no climate emergency. And the alarmist messaging pushed by global elites is purely political. That's what 1,609 scientists and informed professionals stated when they signed the Global Climate Intelligence Group's "World Climate Declaration."

https:/cdm.press/analysis/2023/09/15/meteorologists-scientists-explain-why-there-is-no-climate-emergency/

so you see...and will probably try to deny...man kind has much more pressing issues right now, than the dust bunnies under your bed.

Edited 16 hours ago by Nationalist

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Then why do the vast VAST majority of scientists say otherwise?

Probably because they've all been paid off by the same people. Or threatened by the same people. 

All we really know is that you hysterics are full of shit. You haven't given us anything that the Earth isn't capable of doing all by itself. 

[eyeball]

24 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

The vast majority say the climate is changing. So what? It does that, you can come out from under your bed now.

Seriously...why do you engage in discussing this topic when it's so painfully obvious you're as thick as a brick about it?

28 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

"More than 30,000 scientists have signed on to a paper saying that we're not facing a climate emergency."

Well let's hope they're right and they can convince the other 8.5 million scientists.

30 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

man kind has much more pressing issues right now,

You got that right - nothing makes AGW denial more of a crisis.

[robosmith]

On 6/28/2026 at 2:02 PM, Nationalist said:

Plausible denyability.

Its where they hide. 

What a waste...

Watched the VIDEO and IT LIES about what Bernie said.

IT's not just plausible, Bernie didn't say. "~6 years left before climate catastrophe wiped us out unless we passed his $30T communist Green New Deal."

And you're either an IGNORANT DROPOUT or completely dishonest.

[Nationalist]

13 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Seriously...why do you engage in discussing this topic when it's so painfully obvious you're as thick as a brick about it?

I dont like lies...liars...and fear.

You depend on all three.

I also like prosperity. You...not so much.

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Well let's hope they're right and they can convince the other 8.5 million scientists.

So cough up these 8.5 million scientists who say the global climate is a crisis.

7 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Watched the VIDEO and IT LIES about what Bernie said.

IT's not just plausible, Bernie didn't say. "~6 years left before climate catastrophe wiped us out unless we passed his $30T communist Green New Deal."

And you're either an IGNORANT DROPOUT or completely dishonest.

Oh my! The b1tch is angry.

[Goddess]

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

So cough up these 8.5 million scientists who say the global climate is a crisis.

👆 THIS 👆

[Nationalist]

12 minutes ago, Goddess said:

👆 THIS 👆

He can't because they don't exist. It was just another Libbie, trying desperately to save another of their failures from complete erasure. So he won't respond.

Now...We dont know for sure if people like @eyeball knew they were peddling lies and fear. Or if they are just weak-minded and easily captured by lies and fear. The developments of the last several years have exposed climate fanatics in particular as either just mean spirited...or weak-minded.

The intellectual left...pfft...

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

I dont like lies...liars...and fear.

You depend on all three.

I also like prosperity. You...not so much.

I don't like them either. And your conclusions about what I like or don't like are strictly your own ridiculous knee jerk responses to your conditioning against lefties.

In the meantime...

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

So cough up these 8.5 million scientists who say the global climate is a crisis.

There is overwhelming, heavily documented evidence that a massive scientific consensus exists regarding Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).

Here are 5 sites documenting this consensus.

1.   2.   3.   4.   5.

The reason the consensus is so ironclad is that it is built on independent, overlapping lines of empirical evidence:

Isotopic Carbon Footprint: Carbon-12 levels are rising faster than Carbon-13 in the atmosphere. Burning fossil fuels produces Carbon-12, altering this specific atomic ratio.

Atmospheric Outgoing Radiation: Satellite data shows less heat escaping into space at greenhouse gas wavelengths. Trapped infrared energy matches the exact absorption spectrum of human-produced CO₂.

Troposphere vs. Stratosphere: The lower atmosphere (troposphere) is warming, while the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) is cooling. If solar activity caused global warming, both layers would warm simultaneously.

https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1093/reep/rew019

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/03/causes-of-global-warming/

The science simply is what it is and doing it's job which is present the facts. The crisis is in denying science.

[Legato]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

I don't like them either. And your conclusions about what I like or don't like are strictly your own ridiculous knee jerk responses to your conditioning against lefties.

In the meantime...

There is overwhelming, heavily documented evidence that a massive scientific consensus exists regarding Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).

Here are 5 sites documenting this consensus.

1.   2.   3.   4.   5.

The reason the consensus is so ironclad is that it is built on independent, overlapping lines of empirical evidence:

Isotopic Carbon Footprint: Carbon-12 levels are rising faster than Carbon-13 in the atmosphere. Burning fossil fuels produces Carbon-12, altering this specific atomic ratio.

Atmospheric Outgoing Radiation: Satellite data shows less heat escaping into space at greenhouse gas wavelengths. Trapped infrared energy matches the exact absorption spectrum of human-produced CO₂.

Troposphere vs. Stratosphere: The lower atmosphere (troposphere) is warming, while the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) is cooling. If solar activity caused global warming, both layers would warm simultaneously.

https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1093/reep/rew019

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/03/causes-of-global-warming/

The science simply is what it is and doing it's job which is present the facts. The crisis is in denying science.

Consensus and science are polar opposites.

All you have there is a consensus of making sure of their next grant.

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, Legato said:

Consensus and science are polar opposites.

You make it sound like a fundamental law of physics...get a grip.

6 minutes ago, Legato said:

All you have there is a consensus of making sure of their next grant.

Believing that is to believe some 8 million scientists are in on it.

Or do you subscribe to the theory it's just a handful of psy-op dudes like the COVID authoritarianism people do?

[Legato]

39 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You make it sound like a fundamental law of physics...get a grip.

Believing that is to believe some 8 million scientists are in on it.

Or do you subscribe to the theory it's just a handful of psy-op dudes like the COVID authoritarianism people do?

It is, it's called science, no grip needed.

Grants come with expectations. I thought you knew that.

[eyeball]

25 minutes ago, Legato said:

It is, it's called science,

No what you said is a misinformed opinion. Consensus is a fundamental part of the scientific process.

29 minutes ago, Legato said:

Grants come with expectations. I thought you knew that.

I certainly do, I've been awarded a few myself.

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, eyeball said:

 

Believing that is to believe some 8 million scientists are in on it.

 

Some real climate scientists went after alternatives to carbon caused global warming. This was decades ago, and part of their papers included Predictions that the temperature would start to fall again by now. 

They got grants too. 

What government would not want to find a proof that were coming out of this? 

But conspiracy theories can't be falsified. Conspiracy theorists can't be convinced that they are incorrect.

Lack of evidence that they exist is itself evidence of a cover-up in their minds.

[John Johnston]

24 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Some real climate scientists went after alternatives to carbon caused global warming. This was decades ago, and part of their papers included Predictions that the temperature would start to fall again by now. 

They got grants too. 

What government would not want to find a proof that were coming out of this? 

But conspiracy theories can't be falsified. Conspiracy theorists can't be convinced that they are incorrect.

Lack of evidence that they exist is itself evidence of a cover-up in their minds.

Meanwhile most of America is under water. 

[Deluge]

14 hours ago, robosmith said:

Watched the VIDEO and IT LIES about what Bernie said.

IT's not just plausible, Bernie didn't say. "~6 years left before climate catastrophe wiped us out unless we passed his $30T communist Green New Deal."

And you're either an IGNORANT DROPOUT or completely dishonest.

Bern said that we had roughly a decade. What do you suppose that means? We have 6 years to go. What happens around 2032? 

[Legato]

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

No what you said is a misinformed opinion. Consensus is a fundamental part of the scientific process.

 

Consensus is not part of the scientific method. Science progresses through empirical testing, observation, and falsification, not by majority vote or political negotiation.