Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An inconvenient truth.... or lie?
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 21 of 191 (538310)
12-05-2009 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by DevilsAdvocate
12-05-2009 10:10 AM


Re: Global warming is real!
I think we can all agree that the 'Hockey stick' graphs aren't really reliable in the light of these leaks ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-05-2009 10:10 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-05-2009 2:41 PM slevesque has not replied
 Message 23 by ZenMonkey, posted 12-05-2009 2:41 PM slevesque has not replied
 Message 25 by Taz, posted 12-05-2009 5:15 PM slevesque has replied
 Message 114 by DBlevins, posted 12-09-2009 4:43 PM slevesque has not replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4640 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 36 of 191 (538359)
12-06-2009 1:48 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Taz
12-05-2009 5:15 PM


Re: Global warming is real!
sleveque, I'm going to post the same request I did with Buzsaw. Post quotes directly from the emails themselves and we can discuss from there. You can quote faux news' opinions all you want in a gay-hating evangelical baptist church all you want. I don't think it's too much to ask to look directly at the sources of the so-called controversy.
Ok, WTF this is not only irrelevant (the gay-hating part) but totally absurd and insulting. And Seriously, I'm surprised admins didn't react. This is retarded lol
Anyhow, all I was saying was that it was absurd to come in this thread with the results from the GIEC, precisely when the very controversy is with the reliability of such data.
It was like:
- Look these emails supposedly show that the results were modified to show anthropogenic global wraming
- But no look, the data that they published show anthropogenic global warming ....
- Facepalm*
Anyhow, I'm skeptic about the GIEC resuls for one specific reason:
greenhouse gas who has the biggest effect right now is water vapor. But it is so complicated to simulate in models that we aren't able to do it yet, and so the biggest factor wasn't even taken into account by the GIEC. Yet they published that there was a 90% probability that anthropogenic factors were responsible.
This should ring an alarm bell for everyone, the biggest factor isn't taken into account, and yet they post a 90% figure ? I'm maybe the one not understanding, but something like this certainly ring a bell ...
PS Anyhow, back to the subjects. I've downloaded those emails to check through them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Taz, posted 12-05-2009 5:15 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Meldinoor, posted 12-06-2009 2:15 AM slevesque has not replied
 Message 41 by Taz, posted 12-06-2009 3:16 AM slevesque has not replied
 Message 42 by cavediver, posted 12-06-2009 4:55 AM slevesque has not replied
 Message 127 by DBlevins, posted 12-11-2009 1:07 PM slevesque has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024