The status quo is with doing little to nothing about climate change. The status quo is with the carbon emitters and the fossil fuel industry. That is why they use the tactic of character assassination on scientists, that they are corrupt, that they conspire to fix the evidence. It's all because there is no significant and legitimate opposition to the science which supports AGW.
The status quo is the present toxic state of being/existence whereby the fraud known as AGW finds a suitable environment whereby it can metastasize throughout a hapless humanity.
What evidence do you have? None, therefore, you must attack them personally. It's increasingly pitiful.
You and others are continually trying to make this thread about something it is not. The thread's topic is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-uzNBtdYOo and the implications arising therefrom. Oh, and consider this (predates 'climategate'): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8CVh2deXTI
Hacked e-mails show climate scientists in a bad light but don't change scientific consensus on global warming. http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/ Come back when you have something substantial.
Supreme irony. You're stating the obvious, yet missing the point. A priceless portrait of the 'parable' in a nutshell.
I thought the point was that claims that "global warming has halted" were based on estimates of global temperature from an incomplete sampling of temperatures and there is no slowdown in evidence just like there is no scientific misconduct in evidence. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013EF000165/abstract "An energy imbalance is manifested not just as surface atmospheric or ground warming but also as melting sea and land ice, and heating of the oceans. More than 90% of the heat goes into the oceans and, with melting land ice, causes sea level to rise. For the past decade, more than 30% of the heat has apparently penetrated below 700 m depth that is traceable to changes in surface winds mainly over the Pacific in association with a switch to a negative phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) in 1999. Surface warming was much more in evidence during the 1976–1998 positive phase of the PDO, suggesting that natural decadal variability modulates the rate of change of global surface temperatures while sea-level rise is more relentless. Global warming has not stopped; it is merely manifested in different ways." http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-fast-forward-trenberth.html http://www.theguardian.com/environm...cent/2013/oct/18/global-warming-pause-meaning http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998-intermediate.htm "Of the three surface temperature records (HadCRUT3, NASA GISS, and NCDC), only HadCRUT3 actually shows 1998 as the hottest year on record. For NASA GISS and NCDC, the hottest year on record is 2005. A new independent analysis of the HadCRUT record sheds light on this discrepancy. The analysis is by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) who calculated global temperature, utilizing a range of sources including surface temperature measurements, satellites, radiosondes, ships and buoys. They found warming has been higher than that shown by HadCRUT. This is because HadCRUT is sampling regions that have exhibited less change, on average, than the entire globe." http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2009/land-warming-record
Well, why would I? They have no context, there's no indication of their relevancy or what they might be about, for all I know they're kiddy porn - which, in spite of what you might want to convince yourself, can actually survive on youtube because it has to be reported to be taken down.
What fraud? Is simple harmonic motion fraudulent? Is Quantum Mechanics fraudulent? Is the conservation of mass fraudulent? Is the conservation of energy faudulent? Is the Beer-Lambert law fraudulent?
Yes, because we should ignore the actual physics behind the predictions and focus on the muck raking, right?
I have no problem with science per se. This thread is about those 'doing' the 'science'. http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/18/reddit-bans-comments-from-global-warming-skeptics/
When humanity starts pushing the earth closer to the sun, then I will be worried about global warming. In the mean time, it's all just a bunch of ineffective hot air.
Yeah, sure. Now try telling that to your great-grandchildren. Eventually, they will curse you for it.
So then this thread was never intended to be anything more than a prolonged ad hominem attack with no desire to discuss actual acience?
