Another fun climate change thread

Just because the overall ice mass on Antarctica is growing doesn't change shit about the retreating ice on the northpole and on most gletsjers.

 

So you see that what you call settled science is based on what "may be."

And no, global warming due to human activity has not been proven to be real.

Do you deny this:

UN CONSIDERED DISMISSING THE IPCC SCIENCE BODY!

Did you know the UN almost dismissed the IPCC because their ‘best scientists’ as Gore says did not find human caused global warming after extensive research in 1990? After 5 years of research and discussion, those 3000 best scientist concluded as follows - In the 1995 2nd Assessment Report of the UN IPCC the scientists included these three statements in the draft:

1. “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed (climate) changes to the specific cause of increases in greenhouse gases.”

2. “No study to date has positively attributed all or part (of observed climate change) to anthropogenic (i.e. man-made) causes.”

3. “Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the natural variability of the climate system are reduced.”
__________________________________________________________________________________

How did the UN avoid the 1995 report of the scientists detecting no human warming? The facts here are just as soggy as the infamous hockey stick graph scandal of Michael Mann erasing the established history of the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age. First the UN pushed the scientists aside and has the policy leaders take over writing the conclusion of the science report. They ignored the deep doubt of the working scientist.

Those three statements by ‘scientists’ above were replaced with this by the non science UN Assembly:

“The balance of evidence suggests a discernable human influence on global climate.”

Furthermore:

“WE need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.“
^
Prof. Stephen Schneider,Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports.

WHAT IS THE CONSENSUS ON CLIMATE CHANGE IF NOT 97%? New book reveals UN threatened dismissal of working scientists who concluded: "No study to date has positively attributed all or part (of observed climate change) to anthropogenic (i.e.
_______________________________________________________________________

I'm happy to see that you are no longer challenging the fact that those emails I've provided paint an ugly picture of integrity of the IPCC.

 

Ok then. Show us some pictures

Raw satellite images of the artic over time

 

For what purpose are you asking me that?

 

Should be an easy slam dunk shouldnt it?

Here is a picture of the top of the world say 1969, and here is one 2019, look, all the white stuff is half the size

......and yet......

 

So do it yourself then if you want to make a point with it.
It's like you try to feel me obligated to illustrate my nuancing comment regarding the supposed meaning of the increase of ice on Antarctica. The nuancing comment still stands.
If you think it can and should be countered with the pics you're asking for you do that.

 

I love this thread. Even if people don't agree with each other, I believe it does something to raise our personal and collective awareness toward greater environmental accountability. Nobody's perfect. But the more we talk about it, the closer we get to greener planet; a goal we can all embrace.

 

"The more we talk about it, the closer we get to a greener planet"

Problem solved then. We all just need to talk about it a lot more then

 

On the contrary, I would welcome the scientific findings that prove that manmade global warming is a reality and dangerous. You haven't provided anything in that regard.

“WE need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.“

– Prof. Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Do you understand what people will think when they hear trying to characterize the above as "disputes expressed in emails?" Think about it. I've provided some of the other emails that by no stretch of the imagination can be construed as other than showing the deception and fraud going on within the IPCC. But just for fun, why don't you explain to us all how the following email is just someone "disputing something in an email." And pray tell what is being disputed in this email entry:

“I gave up on [Georgia Institute of Technology climate professor] Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but its not helping the cause,” wrote Mann in another newly released email.

“I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose” skeptical scientist Steve McIntyre, Mann writes in another newly released email."
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

At this point, you should probably define "integrity" so we know that we are both on the same page when it comes to the IPCC.

 

Anyone then?

Anyone else want to give it a try?

Photo overlooking the artic from 50 years ago, even 30 years ago, compared to today?

 

You're hopeless

 

You look the pics up and I will analyze them with you

 

I was serious when I asked you to explain how the following emails is just scientists "disputing something in emails." And what is being disputed?

“WE need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.“

– Prof. Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports.

“I gave up on [Georgia Institute of Technology climate professor] Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but its not helping the cause,” wrote Mann in another newly released email.

“I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose” skeptical scientist Steve McIntyre, Mann writes in another newly released email."