The fable of anthropogenic warming and the fight against CO2

[Exnihiloest]

 
Recall that the subject was:

------------------------------------
"The Arctic sea ice could completely disappear within four years"
https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/ ... _3244.html

"We are heading for a collapse, which should occur in 2015 or 2016, and which will see the Arctic free of ice during the months of August and September. It's a global disaster."

Peter Wadhams, University of Cambridge, 2012.

For an alarmist imbecile, how many imbeciles of the same religion will have relayed his profession of faith?
And they call it science!
-----------------------------------------

Don't try to turn things around, it doesn't take, it never took! Your statements on humanity are more than telling, "useless" such as meter readings, clog makers (non-exhaustive list of which you keep the flavor) through "we will be eternal", there is no picture. If there is one fascist (worse, even) fundamentalist idolatrous, blind and deaf (alas not dumb) on a crusade, it is you, despicable, not me!

I will therefore add that it is not only the imbeciles who refuse to take into account the facts and who say amen to the profession of faith of the incompetent. As they promote ecofascism, we also have narrow-minded, intolerant and omnipresent eco-jihadists a la GuyGadebois who spend their time attacking those who speak out against their religion. Would our eco-jihadist be motivated by a few virgins who will be waiting for him in the paradise of the martyrs, in thanks for the launch of his fatwas? It is because he thinks he is the gugus.

[gildas]

In Turkey, Greece and Albania, dozens of fires linked to scorching heat are still active

https://www.lemonde.fr/international/ar ... _3210.html

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

 
Recall that the subject ....

.... is NO longer relevant since it dates from 2012 and therefore does not interest anyone.

[Exnihiloest]

...
.... is NO longer relevant since it dates from 2012 and therefore does not interest anyone.

"All the IPCC forecasts are from the past, so they don't interest anyone," GuyGadebois finally tells us.
The idiots, that dares everything.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

The idiots, that dares everything.

Indeed:
society-and-philosophy / ecologism-and-fear-of-progress-t16956.html

[Exnihiloest]

 
The new IPCC report claiming that the warming is due to mankind is based only on computer simulations that are totally used outside their domain of validity.

A new study has further undermined this attribution argument. The statistical process itself which has been used for 20 years to "detect the anthropogenic signal" relies on conditions which are absolutely not fulfilled. The claims on the increasingly visible detection of the "anthropogenic signal" in successive IPCC reports are therefore dashed.

It is worse, if we try to overcome the shortcomings of the statistical method used, the "anthropogenic signal" would disappear. The publication is accessible here:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 21-05913-7

Simplified explanations available here:
https://judithcurry.com/2021/08/18/the- ... ly-flawed/

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

(Here, "he" comes back to the charge once again with Judith Curry * and her think tank of climatosceptics sponsored by the industries that emit the most Co2 ... Pure propaganda, pure lie, pure manipulation: The three pillars of Blédina. ..)

* An "impostor" dubbed in France (among others) by Guy Sorman, a crazy ultra-liberal transhumanist junk and Claude Allègre, a sweetie who has always lied. Nice reference!

[Exnihiloest]

(Here, "he" comes back to the charge once again with Judith Curry and her think tank of climatosceptics sponsored by the industries that emit the most Co2 ... Pure propaganda, pure lie, pure manipulation: The three pillars of Blédina .. .)

After 9 days without posting, 8 minutes between my new post and a derisory Pavlovian response from the IPCC, without argument and slander, had to be daring. Idiots never take a vacation.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

Do you want arguments?
So look who is this rot that Blédina dares to take advantage of to continue to give a damn about the world and spread her lies over and over:
(Translated):
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... ry%2F%23s5
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... ry%2F%23s5

When asked about potential conflicts of interest, it was Curry's response to Scientific American:

“I get funding from the fossil fuel industry. My company… has been doing [short-term] hurricane forecasts… for an oil company, since 2007. During this time, I have been both a strong advocate for the IPCC and, more recently, a critic of the IPCC, he there is no correlation between this funding and my public statements.

We take her at her word!

(I notice that when I declare that Blédina's source is not credible, I had moreover already explained it, he replies by insulting me and victimizing himself that it is I who am not credible. Poor clown 2)

[ABC2019]

 
The new IPCC report claiming that the warming is due to mankind is based only on computer simulations that are totally used outside their domain of validity.

A new study has further undermined this attribution argument. The statistical process itself which has been used for 20 years to "detect the anthropogenic signal" relies on conditions which are absolutely not fulfilled. The claims on the increasingly visible detection of the "anthropogenic signal" in successive IPCC reports are therefore dashed.

It is worse, if we try to overcome the shortcomings of the statistical method used, the "anthropogenic signal" would disappear. The publication is accessible here:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 21-05913-7

Simplified explanations available here:
https://judithcurry.com/2021/08/18/the- ... ly-flawed/

McKitrick is of course known to have criticized with McIntyre the statistical methods of reconstructing temperatures with their famous "hockey stick". They are statistics specialists and I think what they say is reliable. Several times they have criticized papers which had been accepted by referees, which sometimes even led the authors to admit their mistakes and withdraw their paper - this is obviously a proof of their competence, if their criticisms were unfounded, obviously the authors would never have retracted!

https://climateaudit.org/2012/10/30/kar ... f-climate/

https://retractionwatch.com/2012/06/11/ ... ed-online/

But as usual, those who do not understand scientific questions, and see science only as a political battlefield, will answer anything ...