Register to Comment
Page 6511 of 6579 FirstFirst ... 551160116411646165016509651065116512651365216561 ... LastLast
Results 65,101 to 65,110 of 65785
Like Tree13928Likes
  1. #65101
    Sailor Sailor is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    56,085

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    What "cycles"?

    Global average temperature gets hotter or colder for a reason.

    If you claim climate is cycling, then there must be some driver of the cycle - as mangaire1 pointed out, like solar effects, or planetary wobbles. All of these have been investigated exhaustively.

    "Possible" does not cut it - it is possible that the cycle is the breathing of a giant invisible dragon, or Jesus farting .... any other suggestions? Anything goes, but that is not science. Actually, belief in the existence of an unknown and imperceptible "cause" of climate change is close to denial, IMHO.
    I asked a simple question concerning why the temperatures noted for the 3 years in question could not be attributable to natural causes. I have not received an answer, only hostility because I dared ask a question. You are not doing science anymore, you have become a cult.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #65102
    gandyalf gandyalf is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,580

    Quote Originally Posted by Breeal View Post
    You appear to have posted a link to a blog run by a cartoonist.
    Go over to WUWT and display your ignorance of John Cook and of Professor Michael Mann.
    They'll buy your bull over there.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #65103
    gandyalf gandyalf is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,580

    Quote Originally Posted by mangaire1 View Post
    what "natural warming cycle" have you in mind, Sailor ?

    sun getting hotter ?
    our planet moving closer to the Sun ?
    change in the composition of the atmosphere ?
    surface of our planet less reflective ?
    el Nino/la Nina ?

    or have you some other "natural" cause in mind ?
    What natural cycles indeed.
    Climate scientists know exactly what is causing recent global warming and they've told, and are still telling, the world about it.
    It is indeed, as you suggest, incumbent upon Sailor to tell us what natural cycle/s he's talking about.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #65104
    Sailor Sailor is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    56,085

    Quote Originally Posted by gandyalf View Post
    What natural cycles indeed.
    Climate scientists know exactly what is causing recent global warming and they've told, and are still telling, the world about it.
    It is indeed, as you suggest, incumbent upon Sailor to tell us what natural cycle/s he's talking about.
    I don't claim to know anything about climate science for the very simple reason that I don't know anything about it. But I was struck by a very strong comment in a report that you posted that stated that it was virtually impossible to account for 3 years of warming as being attributable to natural causes. I asked why this was the case and, instead of answering my question, the whole bloody lot of you treated by question as a hostile act and went straight to Defcon 5.

    I strongly suspect that there is a perfectly good explanation but that none of you really understand it well enough to explain it. And I also know that you are behaving in a cult like manner based on a mindset that treats a question as denial. And that makes for very poor science.

    Go back to your fireside chat, I'll get my explanation elsewhere.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #65105
    gandyalf gandyalf is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,580

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    I asked a simple question concerning why the temperatures noted for the 3 years in question could not be attributable to natural causes. I have not received an answer, only hostility because I dared ask a question. You are not doing science anymore, you have become a cult.
    Nonsense, the abstract to (Mann et al 2017) has been posted, so to the skepticlescience article, among other informative articles.

    What natural cycles are you thinking of?
    Maguier's question is perfectly reasonable and relevant.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #65106
    Sailor Sailor is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    56,085

    Quote Originally Posted by gandyalf View Post
    Nonsense, the abstract to (Mann et al 2017) has been posted, so to the skepticlescience article, among other informative articles.

    What natural cycles are you thinking of?
    Maguier's question is perfectly reasonable and relevant.
    I gave solar cycles as an example of a factor that can influence climate, but basically I just asked a question. But never mind. Good night.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #65107
    gandyalf gandyalf is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,580

    Quote Originally Posted by Turbinator View Post
    You are highlighting your ignorance of climate science. The planet has been naturally warming since the end of the little ice-age in 1850. This together with increasing UHI effects explains any minor warming in the last 100 years.
    I beg to differ, the display of ignorance is yours:

    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/insidecl...medieval%3famp

    The MWP was not global.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #65108
    Breeal Breeal is online now

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    3,232

    Quote Originally Posted by gandyalf View Post
    I beg to differ, the display of ignorance is yours:

    https://www.google.ie/amp/s/insidecl...medieval%3famp

    The MWP was not global.
    Incorrect........AGAIN!

    https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&sourc...pwKIYw&ampcf=1

    Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #65109
    gandyalf gandyalf is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,580

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    I don't claim to know anything about climate science for the very simple reason that I don't know anything about it. But I was struck by a very strong comment in a report that you posted that stated that it was virtually impossible to account for 3 years of warming as being attributable to natural causes. I asked why this was the case and, instead of answering my question, the whole bloody lot of you treated by question as a hostile act and went straight to Defcon 5.

    I strongly suspect that there is a perfectly good explanation but that none of you really understand it well enough to explain it. And I also know that you are behaving in a cult like manner based on a mindset that treats a question as denial. And that makes for very poor science.

    Go back to your fireside chat, I'll get my explanation elsewhere.
    More nonsense, your question was answered with various links and you were asked a very reasonable question.
    That's it, nobody attacked you in any way.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #65110
    Breeal Breeal is online now

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    3,232

    Quote Originally Posted by gandyalf View Post
    More nonsense, your question was answered with various links and you were asked a very reasonable question.
    That's it, nobody attacked you in any way.
    You answered it with a link to a blog run by a cartoonist masquerading as an Alarmist FFS!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment