Skip to content

Climate Realists - The Realists Take on Climate Change
  • Home
  • News Trends
  • Polls
  • Forum
  • FAQs
  • Archive
  • Bios
  • About
  • Contact
The Discussions
  • Board index ‹ The Discussions ‹ The Effect of AGW

  • Print view
  • FAQ
  • Login

If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Debate AGW with Questioner and other like minded members.
Topic locked
93 posts • Page 3 of 10 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Gropes » Fri Jul 16, 2010 8:23 pm

Climate Realist wrote:according to the lying activist James Hansen maybe.

But in reality (see WUWT for the info) summer temperatures in the Arctic have not increased for years. The changes in ice is due to wind patterns.

Like i said- you need to study some science so you actually know what you are talking about before trying to debate. Are you afraid that if you learn the science your beliefs will crumble around you?? because they will. CAGW is fake, as are you.


You need to stop misleading the debate like Lord Monckton is? Wind patterns is just one part of the story. The science is clear, the volume of ice is decreasing. No amount of your disinformation is going to change that!
Gropes
 
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:05 pm
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Climate Realist » Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:05 am

The volume was the same each year, it is extent Monckton talks of, stop distorting the facts and data like all your AGW friends do.

You're going to have to stop being such a Troll or you will get banned! You already admitted you don't believe in the Greenhouse effect.

Go study some Maths , Physics, chemistry and Astronomy then come back and debate when you have grown up.
Climate Realist
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:45 am
Location: Kent
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Gropes » Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:27 am

Climate Realist wrote:The volume was the same each year, it is extent Monckton talks of, stop distorting the facts and data like all your AGW friends do.

You're going to have to stop being such a Troll or you will get banned! You already admitted you don't believe in the Greenhouse effect.

Go study some Maths , Physics, chemistry and Astronomy then come back and debate when you have grown up.



I've already given you two links to show Monckton's lies. Are you going to tell me Monckton is right and NASA is wrong? Monckton quotes extent but NOT volume because that would blow his case out of the water! And you know that!! So stop lying you pathetic little ignoramus!
Gropes
 
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:05 pm
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Co2sceptic » Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:40 am

Hi Guys

Many thanks for keeping the debate going but not insulting or incorrect use of names please
Co2sceptic
Site Admin
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:05 am
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Ravenna » Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:57 pm

Gropes wrote:Sorry, I don't bother with frivolousgates. Like most people, I prefer to look at the big picture instead of jumping up and down bashing scientists over 3 words in an email or a typo in a 3000 page document.


It is obvious that you have ignored them or you would not be so dismissive over them.
Ravenna
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:53 pm
  • Website
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Ravenna » Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:01 pm

Gropes wrote:
Climate Realist wrote:according to the lying activist James Hansen maybe.

But in reality (see WUWT for the info) summer temperatures in the Arctic have not increased for years. The changes in ice is due to wind patterns.

Like i said- you need to study some science so you actually know what you are talking about before trying to debate. Are you afraid that if you learn the science your beliefs will crumble around you?? because they will. CAGW is fake, as are you.


You need to stop misleading the debate like Lord Monckton is? Wind patterns is just one part of the story. The science is clear, the volume of ice is decreasing. No amount of your disinformation is going to change that!


Have you caught up with the news that the Arctic ice level are among the highest of the decade for the month of July?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/18/sea-ice-news-14/
Ravenna
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:53 pm
  • Website
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Mike Davis » Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:36 pm

Why would anyone care about the ice area, extent, or volume in the Arctic when all we have are guesses at what those are or were? Historically the Argtic region has been ice covered all year long and ice free for up to 10 months just in the last 15 thousand years. Once upon a time the arctic was a tropical region. When the temperatures are below freezing and the ice is reduced I would think wind might play a major roll along with wave patterns which are driven by the wind. As there is only an 85% error rate in the observations I would wait until they were able to reduce that to under 50% before calling BS on all of it.
Some group claiming that sea ice is proof of anything deserves to be ridiculed and made fun of just as Monckton has been doing. I am surprised that more comedy writers do not realize the amount of joke material that is being produced by the AGW advocates every day.
Mike Davis
 
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 12:43 pm
Location: Hills of East Tennessee
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Climate Realist » Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:07 am

Mike, as for comedy writers, Penn and Teller did a really funny program on global warming. As for the rest, they are scared that it is a taboo subject, so they won't touch it.
Climate Realist
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:45 am
Location: Kent
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Gropes » Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:26 am

Ravenna wrote:
Gropes wrote:Sorry, I don't bother with frivolousgates. Like most people, I prefer to look at the big picture instead of jumping up and down bashing scientists over 3 words in an email or a typo in a 3000 page document.


It is obvious that you have ignored them or you would not be so dismissive over them.



Hmm, looks like you keep ignoring the questions you have asked me to raise in this forum when I first joined. What is it Ravenna, afraid you have no answers? Why don't you answer the question you ask me to raise in my first few days here, why did Lord Monckton confuse surface area and volume? A question Philip, Mike Davis, Climate Realist have so dismally failed to answer and you have spent most of it avoilding. Here is the link again

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=439&start=30
Last edited by Gropes on Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Gropes
 
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:05 pm
Top

Re: If Q has gone shall I remove his articles?

Postby Gropes » Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:32 am

Ravenna wrote:
Gropes wrote:
Climate Realist wrote:according to the lying activist James Hansen maybe.

But in reality (see WUWT for the info) summer temperatures in the Arctic have not increased for years. The changes in ice is due to wind patterns.

Like i said- you need to study some science so you actually know what you are talking about before trying to debate. Are you afraid that if you learn the science your beliefs will crumble around you?? because they will. CAGW is fake, as are you.


You need to stop misleading the debate like Lord Monckton is? Wind patterns is just one part of the story. The science is clear, the volume of ice is decreasing. No amount of your disinformation is going to change that!


Have you caught up with the news that the Arctic ice level are among the highest of the decade for the month of July?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/18/sea-ice-news-14/


Perhaps NASA is a better source for these kinds of updates.

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2009/ju ... a_Ice.html

But please explain to me, why did Lord Monckton confuse surface area with volume in his presentation in the thread you conviniently ignored.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=439&start=30
Gropes
 
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:05 pm
Top

PreviousNext

Topic locked
93 posts • Page 3 of 10 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10

Return to The Effect of AGW

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

  • Board index
  • The team • Delete all board cookies • All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
cron

© 2008-2013 ClimateRealists.com | Contact Webmaster | Privacy Policy