Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)

[Diderot]

You’ve had plenty of time today to verify the Academie des Sciences’ position on the existence of the pause (and their explanation of the reason behind it) that I take your lack of response and persistent swerving away from the issue an admission of mea culpa. Would you like me to show you what they actually publish on the issue? I’m not assuming you can read French but it’s always worth seeing it dans le texte don’t you find?

Trouble is loony that it’s not just that venerable French institution its most of them which take positions that you seem to be in opposition to. WRT the Academie des Sciences you deny the very existence of the 18 year pause whereas they 1. Acknowledge its existence and 2. Proffer an explanation for it.

Nulius in Verba.

[LoonyTunes]

You've had even more time to answer my question as to why no scientific institutions agree with your position on AGW.

Still struggling?

How about you name a couple that do?

[LoonyTunes]

I feel the need to further update my list lest anyone should think it's come to an end

1. The Royal Society
2. NASA
3. The National Center for Atmospheric Research
4. Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
5. International Research Institute for Climate and Society
6. University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
7. Academies des Sciences, France
8. American Geophysical Union
9. American Association for the Advancement of Science
10. The British Antarctic Survey
11. American Chemical Society
12. American Meteorological Society
13. U.S. Global Change Research Program
14. American Physical Society
15. American Association Of State Climatologists
16. Geological Society of America

[Diderot]

LoonyTunes said:

You've had even more time to answer my question as to why no scientific institutions agree with your position on AGW.

Still struggling?

How about you name a couple that do?

But most of the institutions you list don’t agree with your position (your denial) of the pause. So who to believe/trust/have faith in?

[Diderot]

LoonyTunes said:

I feel the need to further update my list lest anyone should think it's come to an end

1. The Royal Society
2. NASA
3. The National Center for Atmospheric Research
4. Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
5. International Research Institute for Climate and Society
6. University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
7. Academies des Sciences, France
8. American Geophysical Union
9. American Association for the Advancement of Science
10. The British Antarctic Survey
11. American Chemical Society
12. American Meteorological Society
13. U.S. Global Change Research Program
14. American Physical Society
15. American Association Of State Climatologists
16. Geological Society of America

You still deny the 18 year pause but post a list of intuitions that disagree with your view on that. I’m not sure you’re comprehending the irony of the situation.

[LoonyTunes]

They ALL agree with AGW. And ALL reject your denialist argument.

HTH.

[gadgetmac]

Diderot said:

LoonyTunes said:

You've had even more time to answer my question as to why no scientific institutions agree with your position on AGW.

Still struggling?

How about you name a couple that do?

But most of the institutions you list don’t agree with your position (your denial) of the pause. So who to believe/trust/have faith in?

I’ll humour you, link to their statement and the date of it

[LoonyTunes]

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

LoonyTunes said:

You've had even more time to answer my question as to why no scientific institutions agree with your position on AGW.

Still struggling?

How about you name a couple that do?

But most of the institutions you list don’t agree with your position (your denial) of the pause. So who to believe/trust/have faith in?

I’ll humour you, link to their statement and the date of it

I wouldn't humour him, he's never answered one question yet.

[gadgetmac]

Diderot said:

But most of the institutions you list don’t agree with your position (your denial) of the pause. So who to believe/trust/have faith in?

Pause?

National Academy of Sciences-Royal Society Report

A joint report from the UK Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences in February 2014 said that there is no "pause" in climate change and that the temporary and short-term slowdown in the rate of increase in average global surface temperatures in the non-polar regions is likely to start accelerating again in the near future. "Globally averaged surface temperature has slowed down. I wouldn’t say it's paused. It depends on the datasets you look at. If you look at datasets that include the Arctic, it is clear that global temperatures are still increasing," said Tim Palmer, a co-author of the report and a professor at University of Oxford.

Edited by gadgetmac on Sunday 16th September 22:59

[gadgetmac]

Just doing some light reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-co...

In the summer of 2015, Grant Foster and John Abraham published a paper showing that there was no statistical evidence of a pause:

A barrage of statistical tests was applied to global surface temperature time series to search for evidence of any significant departure from a linear increase at constant rate since 1970. In every case, the analysis not only failed to establish a trend change with statistical significance, it failed by a wide margin.

A few months later, a study by Stephen Lewandowsky, James Risbey, and Naomi Oreskes showed that not only did the myth lack statistical support, but in a blind test, economists found “pause” claims “misleading and ill-informed.” In fact, by late 2015, at least six papers had been published debunking this myth. The record-shattering hot temperatures of 2015 and 2016 were simply more nails in its coffin. It’s a coffin with so many nails it’s hard to find room for more.

Why won’t this myth stay dead?

It’s difficult to fathom why deniers don’t just move on to peddling other less transparent climate myths, but the sad reality is that these myths are like zombies. They never die. Just last week I suggested that deniers will soon reset the myth to “no warming since 2016,” but apparently I gave them too much credit. They won’t even admit the fact that human-caused global warming raised the Earth’s surface temperature 0.35°C since 1998.

But as I keep repeating, facts matter, and people who continue to deny reality in the face of evidence and facts should no longer be considered credible.

[LoonyTunes]

Good luck.

[dickymint]

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

LoonyTunes said:

Diderot said:

Be my guest.

By the way, are you aware of the Academie des Sciences' stated position on the 18 year pause?

I'm aware of their position on AGW. Are you?

Are you also aware that not a single National science academy disputes or denies the scientific consensus around human-caused Climate Change?

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Try answering his outstanding question then I’ll answer your question as the answer is blatantly obvious.

I wasn’t talking to you.

Ooooh bet that hurt........................

[gadgetmac]

dickymint said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

LoonyTunes said:

Diderot said:

Be my guest.

By the way, are you aware of the Academie des Sciences' stated position on the 18 year pause?

I'm aware of their position on AGW. Are you?

Are you also aware that not a single National science academy disputes or denies the scientific consensus around human-caused Climate Change?

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Try answering his outstanding question then I’ll answer your question as the answer is blatantly obvious.

I wasn’t talking to you.

Ooooh bet that hurt........................

Yeah, like being savaged by a dead sheep.

[Diderot]

Still swerving I see. The Academie des Sciences’ position on the pause, a pause which you deny existed, is the question which you all are trying to swerve away from addressing.

You listed it as an institution to support your view, but the reality is they provide an explanation for the pause; the very pause you deny existed. So, echoing your argumentation, either the Academie des Science established by the Sun King is wrong or you are. I have read their statement on their website ... have you?

Edited by Diderot on Sunday 16th September 23:37

[dickymint]

gadgetmac said:

dickymint said:

Diderot said:

gadgetmac said:

Diderot said:

LoonyTunes said:

Diderot said:

Be my guest.

By the way, are you aware of the Academie des Sciences' stated position on the 18 year pause?

I'm aware of their position on AGW. Are you?

Are you also aware that not a single National science academy disputes or denies the scientific consensus around human-caused Climate Change?

Nice attempt at a swerve there Loony.

So let me get this straight, you deny the existence of the 18 year pause and yet you list the Academie des Sciences in support. Do you not see a certain irony? Probably not because that would have involved reading.

Try answering his outstanding question then I’ll answer your question as the answer is blatantly obvious.

I wasn’t talking to you.

Ooooh bet that hurt........................

Yeah, like being savaged by a dead sheep.

Talking of dead sheep.....

gadgetmac said:

So no link to Wunsch 2018?

That raises questions.

No matter, anybody else got it?

Managed to find it yet? 2 words and one click top of the list Google Fu let you down?

Say good night Dick.............






















Rowan and Martins Laugh In




































:german accent: Simple but stooopid

[LoonyTunes]

gadgetmac said:

Pause?

National Academy of Sciences-Royal Society Report

A joint report from the UK Royal Society and the US National Academy of Sciences in February 2014 said that there is no "pause" in climate change

The Royal Society! But that can't be true because Diderot said...

Diderot said:

You still deny the 18 year pause but post a list of intuitions that disagree with your view on that.

[gadgetmac]

Diderot said:

Still swerving I see. The Academie des Sciences’ position on the pause, a pause which you deny existed, is the question which you all are trying to swerve away from addressing.

You listed it as an institution to support your view, but the reality is they provide an explanation for the pause; the very pause you deny existed. So, echoing your argumentation, either the Academie des Science established by the Sun King is wrong or you are. I have read their statement on their website ... have you?

Science appears to deny your pause.

Anyway, I’ve entertained you so a Link please in English and a date for the statement.

Cheers!

[Diderot]

gadgetmac said:

Just doing some light reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-co...

In the summer of 2015, Grant Foster and John Abraham published a paper showing that there was no statistical evidence of a pause:

A barrage of statistical tests was applied to global surface temperature time series to search for evidence of any significant departure from a linear increase at constant rate since 1970. In every case, the analysis not only failed to establish a trend change with statistical significance, it failed by a wide margin.

A few months later, a study by Stephen Lewandowsky, James Risbey, and Naomi Oreskes showed that not only did the myth lack statistical support, but in a blind test, economists found “pause” claims “misleading and ill-informed.” In fact, by late 2015, at least six papers had been published debunking this myth. The record-shattering hot temperatures of 2015 and 2016 were simply more nails in its coffin. It’s a coffin with so many nails it’s hard to find room for more.

Why won’t this myth stay dead?

It’s difficult to fathom why deniers don’t just move on to peddling other less transparent climate myths, but the sad reality is that these myths are like zombies. They never die. Just last week I suggested that deniers will soon reset the myth to “no warming since 2016,” but apparently I gave them too much credit. They won’t even admit the fact that human-caused global warming raised the Earth’s surface temperature 0.35°C since 1998.

But as I keep repeating, facts matter, and people who continue to deny reality in the face of evidence and facts should no longer be considered credible.

Light reading is right! Oh my, Dana Nuttifella strikes again in The Guardian. So, who is one to trust, an activist funded by oil money (Nuttifella) or an Academie established by Louis XIV? Stark choices for those of an ovine disposition.

Keep listing institutions Loony. I enjoy irony mise-en-abîme.

Edited by Diderot on Sunday 16th September 23:53

[LoonyTunes]

Diderot said:

You listed it as an institution to support your view, but the reality is they provide an explanation for the pause.

You're an idiot

The list has fk all to do with the (non) pause.

[LoonyTunes]

gadgetmac said:

I’ll humour you, link to their statement and the date of it

Like I said, you will never get an answer from him. Put him on your ignore list.