too bad that IPCC statement was in 2005 and since then we've had no warming
how does that fit with human activity increasing CO2?

answer, it doesnt

and by the way, the term "likely" does not indicate proof of anything

Actually we have had warming. This year is heading to be the hottest on record, so far 4 months this year have been the hottest of those months on record. Warmest 6 month period on record from Apr-Sept. Given all that, I have posted a news article 4 times today that says it is not just about years or months but decade trends (with all those pretty pictures you like) showing 2000-2009 is the warmest decade on record. Stop trolling, you have seen all of this. FUCK YOU! YOU ARE A FUCKING WASTE OF TIME! :evil: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK! YOU FUCKING TROLL!!!!!!!!!

so now you're changing tack because you've been thoroughly outpointed

are you now trying to tell me that news organisations have more credibility?

i've already debunked your "scientific academy" joint signatory statement and the numerous third world puppet state tin pot academies in the other list

peer reviewed articles? there are thousands on both sides of the divide, its pointless posting them as it proves nothing.
one paid scientist writes a paper, another one or two agrees. bam! peer reviewed. what does it prove? nothing

credibility of scientists says more, the weight of evidence says more

computer models are the only thing that the warmists have supporting their arguments.

therefore perhaps we should be asking computer programmers what the likelihood of accuracy of these models are, however the weight of evidence suggests not very

more CO2, no warming in 18 years

nobody is disputing those two facts however what some are trying to say is the warming is being hidden in other places :lol:

please, this is too funny. your gullibility is boundless it really is

if you want to find truth, follow the trail of money and see who benefits from all of this. its not the Africans, its not the planet and its not you... i can tell you now

provide proof and location

i know for a fact that eastern europe has experienced very early season snow this autumn so i cant see how this could possibly be true

you're meltdown is indicative of one whose brain simply cannot accommodate the dissonance of misinformation you've been led to believe

i've seen this before in other subjects.

Bullion, there's nearly 50 pages of this rubbish. Everyone knows ricecrackers is full of shit, don't waste your time.

stop crying you pathetic specimen

Post from The Greens, my Facebook wall two days ago.

Check fucking mate.

-PB

[youtube]5JD6ejmlpa8[/youtube]

=d> =d> =d>

ricecrackers is not a good boy.

this always ends the same way
i post an article. i school each of the attackers in the debate and the place goes into meltdown

some of you require some serious introspection

omg how dumb is this idiot :lol:
oh dear :lol:

The thunderstorm we had Sunday night was pretty amazing. One of my favourite things about summer in Adelaide.

Edited by mcjules: 28/10/2014 08:36:37 PM

wow lightning
never happened before climate change :lol:

This is from Jiuzhaigou in China. Visited once, it was really beautiful.It's at quite a high altitude and the climate changed quite rapidly over the few days I was there. One day it was cold and rainy, the next day really dry and then the last day I almost didn't get out of there as it snowed!
r

thats weather pal, not climate

Can you post it here?

I see you still have a vagina.

Problem here is that your definition of schooling is to state your side of the argument as incontrovertible truth and posit the argument that anyone who argues the point knows nothing.

I do believe in climate change, but it is eyebrow-raising whenever an abnormal weather event occurs and people automatically point to climate change.

hey you started with the ad hominem buddy from the get go. this wont be forgotten.

This seems to occur on both sides of the argument. It's unhelpful for either point of view.

Yep agreed. You can look at frequency of occurrence as an indicator though.

:roll:

for those who don't believe that climate change is human caused which of the following four points are disputed

1. increasing carbon dioxide in a system increases the amount of heat capture in a system if the heat source is the same. This can be demonstrated at home with a simple example even if you are in primary school
https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/climate-change-lesson-1
2. humans have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
3. The climate has warmed over the last 100 years http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics.php?g=47
4. You can model the temperature of the earth's history accurately if you use Co2 as a factor as well as other factors like the sun. But there is no model which can reproduce the Earth's temperature history without including Co2 as a factor

To short circuit this here's their (or his answers)

1. A bottle isn't the Earth
2. So?
3. No it hasn't, your sources are debunked, my (dubious) source is better
4. No you can't

Yes all these responses are rubbish but I'll write them in a way that will try and get you to respond to me.

=d>

hot off the presses

founder of weather channel vs current CEO of weather channel

[youtube]dXhb3H2oRhQ[/youtube]



Edited by ricecrackers: 3/11/2014 01:01:24 PM