APP - States sue over EPA CO2 ruling

IPCC fail! who are the idiots who still believe this crap?
tc02vsIPCC.jpg
 
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/surface_temp.pdf

http://weeklystandard.com/articles/denial

It is truly amazing that the fear mongering denialists such as Cypress continually spout off the absurd claim that 'science is on their side' or rely on government agencies committed to propagating this myth in order to gain more control over the populace for their 'credibility'.

Yet ask them to answer any of the questions raised from the constant stream of problems the IPCC and others have with their faked 'science' and all you get is....

'we have government agencies on our side'
'we will not answer those questions'
'all ur info must be coming from right wing bloggers (or now his very favorite... call everyone who disagrees a 'teabagger')'

Bottom line, people like Cypress are complete lemmings. He has no control over his own thoughts. He is spoon fed his lying propaganda from his masters. He refuses to look at or refute any evidence against his masters fear mongering. For if he were to admit there is a problem, it would show the world what most of us already know and force him to admit to himself... that he is indeed one of the greatest fools on this planet.

There is a 110 page report on the use of weather stations linked above Cypress. Do read it. I know you won't read the weekly standard piece because of the source, but for the rest of you, feel free to point out the highlights of that article that list all the problems that the brain dead kool aid drinking fear mongering denialist lemmings like Cypress will continually refuse to address.
 
from the 110 page report

SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS
1. Instrumental temperature data for the pre-satellite era (1850-1980) have been so widely, systematically, and unidirectionally tampered with that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been any significant “global warming” in the 20th century.

2. All terrestrial surface-temperature databases exhibit very serious problems that render them useless for determining accurate long-term temperature trends.

3. All of the problems have skewed the data so as greatly to overstate observed warming both regionally and globally.

4. Global terrestrial temperature data are gravely compromised because more than three-quarters of the 6,000 stations that once existed are no longer reporting.

5. There has been a severe bias towards removing higher-altitude, higher-latitude, and rural stations, leading to a further serious overstatement of warming.

6. Contamination by urbanization, changes in land use, improper siting, and inadequately-calibrated instrument upgrades further overstates warming.

7. Numerous peer-reviewed papers in recent years have shown the overstatement of observed longer term warming is 30-50% from heat-island contamination alone.

8. Cherry-picking of observing sites combined with interpolation to vacant data grids may make heat-island bias greater than 50% of 20th-century warming.

9. In the oceans, data are missing and uncertainties are substantial. Comprehensive coverage has only been available since 2003, and shows no warming.

10. Satellite temperature monitoring has provided an alternative to terrestrial stations in compiling the global lower-troposphere temperature record. Their findings are increasingly diverging from the station-based constructions in a manner consistent with evidence of a warm bias in the surface temperature record.

11. NOAA and NASA, along with CRU, were the driving forces behind the systematic hyping of 20th-century “global warming”.

12. Changes have been made to alter the historical record to mask cyclical changes that could be readily explained by natural factors like multidecadal ocean and solar changes.

13. Global terrestrial data bases are seriously flawed and can no longer be trusted to assess climate trends or VALIDATE model forecasts.

14. An inclusive external assessment is essential of the surface temperature record of CRU, GISS and NCDC “chaired and paneled by mutually agreed to climate scientists who do not have a vested interest in the outcome of the evaluations.”

15. Reliance on the global data by both the UNIPCC and the US GCRP/CCSP also requires a full investigation and audit.
Click to expand...
 
Superfreak said:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/surface_temp.pdf

http://weeklystandard.com/articles/denial

It is truly amazing that the fear mongering denialists such as Cypress continually spout off the absurd claim that 'science is on their side' or rely on government agencies committed to propagating this myth in order to gain more control over the populace for their 'credibility'.

Yet ask them to answer any of the questions raised from the constant stream of problems the IPCC and others have with their faked 'science' and all you get is....

'we have government agencies on our side'
'we will not answer those questions'
'all ur info must be coming from right wing bloggers (or now his very favorite... call everyone who disagrees a 'teabagger')'

Bottom line, people like Cypress are complete lemmings. He has no control over his own thoughts. He is spoon fed his lying propaganda from his masters. He refuses to look at or refute any evidence against his masters fear mongering. For if he were to admit there is a problem, it would show the world what most of us already know and force him to admit to himself... that he is indeed one of the greatest fools on this planet.

There is a 110 page report on the use of weather stations linked above Cypress. Do read it. I know you won't read the weekly standard piece because of the source, but for the rest of you, feel free to point out the highlights of that article that list all the problems that the brain dead kool aid drinking fear mongering denialist lemmings like Cypress will continually refuse to address.
Click to expand...

No shit! The dork tries to claim I'm suddenly saying CO2 in a natural element essential for life. It's a god damned fact. What an idiot. He's laughable. Ask him to cite a single study that proves human CO2 drives climate or led to any catstrophic events, and what do you get?-- Nothing.

I bet he still believes global warming killed all the rain forest frogs despite it being disproven. He probably still believes the the glaciers will melt by 2035.
He probably still believes everything he reads from sources like Joe Romm and Gavin Schmidtt.

Cypress is simply an eco-bot spouting off the same tired discredited science. It's truly pathetic. The sceptics have beaten the mighty IPCC into submission. The leader has alredy stepped down. The railroad engineer who claims voodoo science whenever flaws and fabrications in the IPCC report are revealed is as fervent a beliver as old crypiss. LOL True nutters.

CO2 is a lagging indicator of warming, not the cause, and while it has a feedback effect, it does not drive climate and the feedback effect has been ridiculously overplayed by alarmists.

dolts like crypiss are just too damn easy to lead around as evidenced by his refusal to examine the science.

hah what a loser
 
Southern Man said:
Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas, 2.3 times more than CO2.

How do large buildings in every city keep cool during the summer? Have you ever heard of evaporative cooling?

How about irrigation for farming? How much water vapor is given off?

What gives off more water vapor per acre, and ocean or a forest?

Along with CO2, water vapor is a product of complete combustion of hydrocarbon fuels, even when using fuel cells. Water vapor is the sole byproduct of complete combustion of hydrogen fuels, that is if we ignore the pollutant oxygen.

I assume that you know how to use Google so I'll wait patiently for your response. :)
Click to expand...


Now you're just guessing, speculating, and spinning. Please man, just stop. Everything I said is easily available from credible scientific sources. There's no need for you to guess, speculate, and spin about water vapor.

My previous post to you about water was 100% correct. It's not my fault if you don't have the foggiest clue about climate science. If you need corroboration from a scientific source with unimpeachable qualifications, then I present the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration:

"Water Vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, which is why it is addressed here first. However, changes in its concentration is also considered to be a result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change, but as yet is still fairly poorly measured and understood."

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/gases.html
Click to expand...


And no, I do not accept the rightwing rag "Weekly Standard" as a credible or non-partisan source of climate science. I give you permission to continue babbling about a global scientific conspiracy. No credible scientific organization on the planet is buying your babble...that's why you rely on rightblogs and rightwing rags. You teabagger climate denialists are as bad as the 9/11 truthers, sheesh. Carry on.
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
Now you're just guessing, speculating, and spinning. Please man, just stop. Everything I said is easily available from credible scientific sources. There's no need for you to guess, speculate, and spin about water vapor.

My previous post to you about water was 100% correct. It's not my fault if you don't have the foggiest clue about climate science. If you need corroboration from a scientific source with unimpeachable qualifications, then I present the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration:




And no, I do not accept the rightwing rag "Weekly Standard" as a credible or non-partisan source of climate science. I give you permission to continue babbling about a global scientific conspiracy. No credible scientific organization on the planet is buying your babble...that's why you rely on rightblogs and rightwing rags. You teabagger climate denialists are as bad as the 9/11 truthers, sheesh. Carry on.
Click to expand...

Care to answer my previous questions?
 
Cypress said:
And no, I do not accept the rightwing rag "Weekly Standard" as a credible or non-partisan source of climate science. I give you permission to continue babbling about a global scientific conspiracy. No credible scientific organization on the planet is buying your babble...that's why you rely on rightblogs and rightwing rags. You teabagger climate denialists are as bad as the 9/11 truthers, sheesh. Carry on.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving me correct. Yet another of Cypress' flat earth denialist rantings. 'oh right wing blogs' 'oh the government agencies who I pretend are scientific organizations don't criticize their own work'... blah blah blah blah....

Once again he ignores the scientists who are indeed coming out against the fear mongers bullshit. He pretends there is no problem with their 'research'.

He will ignore the study on the weather monitoring stations. He will ignore any evidence that would dare suggest his beloved masters lied to him.

Bottom line, there is no point discussing an issue like this with such a brain dead flat earth fear mongering moron like Cypress. He will only accept what his masters tell him.
 
Cypress said:
Now you're just guessing, speculating, and spinning. Please man, just stop. Everything I said is easily available from credible scientific sources. There's no need for you to guess, speculate, and spin about water vapor.

My previous post to you about water was 100% correct. It's not my fault if you don't have the foggiest clue about climate science. If you need corroboration from a scientific source with unimpeachable qualifications, then I present the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration:




And no, I do not accept the rightwing rag "Weekly Standard" as a credible or non-partisan source of climate science. I give you permission to continue babbling about a global scientific conspiracy. No credible scientific organization on the planet is buying your babble...that's why you rely on rightblogs and rightwing rags. You teabagger climate denialists are as bad as the 9/11 truthers, sheesh. Carry on.
Click to expand...

:hand:
 
tinfoil said:
You dolt, I'm talking about CO2 being classified as a pollutant. Get the argument straight. If you want to talk about OTHER pollutants, fine, but as far as CO2 goes, it's not a god damned pollutant. It's one of the basic elements of life! It has failed to create the dangerous forcing predicted. Shall we go back and look at the IPCC predictions from a decade ago? Please do! I'm sure you'll ignore the fact that todays temp is outside their predicted range.
Click to expand...

:palm: Actually, the discussion is about the ARTIFICIAL LEVELS that are being produced by industry, NOT what naturally occurs.

Got that, you ignorant lout? And there is a hell of a lot more contained in the exhausts of the smokestacks...or were you in a coma when our lakes were being killed off by acid rain?

You keep playing the same broken record, and you keep denying any and all other information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top