Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?

Warming and Climate Change: causes, consequences, analysis ... Debate on CO2 and other greenhouse gas.
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by Exnihiloest » 05/02/20, 23:03

GuyGadebois wrote:
Exnihiloest wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:Not only do you not know how to read but you understand that damn. Well done "graduate spirit".


https://skepticalscience.com/Powell.html

One last: We do not care about your spoiled 83 year old who is not a climatologist (James L. Powell).


It's not my sweetie, it's yours, the one cited in the first link you provided! : Lol: : Lol: : Lol:
This link refers to Powell's as pointless as biased study:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 7617707079

So you mess up anything by Pavlovian reflex, without even reading!
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by GuyGadebois » 05/02/20, 23:09

Exnihiloest wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:

One last: We do not care about your spoiled 83 year old who is not a climatologist (James L. Powell).


It's not my sweetie, it's yours, the one cited in the first link you provided! : Lol: : Lol: : Lol:
This link refers to Powell's as pointless as biased study:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 7617707079

So you mess up anything by Pavlovian reflex, without even reading!

I admit that I rushed, but he is not the only one to say that.
Do not poise, 99% of what you throw is stew. I am not infallible.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by izentrop » 05/02/20, 23:12

Exnihiloest wrote: Have you read the study?
https://skepticalscience.com/Powell.html
Ah! indeed this source is really serious thank you.

Basically James Powell lacked rigor and made several mistakes.
The robust consensus would actually be 97% https://skepticalscience.com/97-percent ... robust.htm
1 x
ABC2019
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12927
Registration: 29/12/19, 11:58
x 1008

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by ABC2019 » 06/02/20, 00:41

izentrop wrote:
Exnihiloest wrote: Have you read the study?
https://skepticalscience.com/Powell.html
Ah! indeed this source is really serious thank you.

Basically James Powell lacked rigor and made several mistakes.
The robust consensus would actually be 97% https://skepticalscience.com/97-percent ... robust.htm

remind me what consensus on what has been tested, exactly?
0 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)

Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by Exnihiloest » 06/02/20, 22:11

GuyGadebois wrote:...
Do not poise, 99% of what you throw is stew. I am not infallible.

What you do not understand, as well as what does not pass between your blinders, for you is "crap". 99% seems a reasonable number to me.
0 x
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by Exnihiloest » 06/02/20, 22:20

izentrop wrote:...
The robust consensus would actually be 97%

As the skeptical theses are not published, and the study relates only to visible papers, therefore which have passed censorship, we are not surprised by the result. 97% was the order of magnitude of the election scores for the Soviet leaders.
Climate realists do not fit into these statistics. In summary, 97% of warmists believe in warming, and there are 3% of traitors.
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by GuyGadebois » 06/02/20, 22:21

Exnihiloest wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:...
Do not poise, 99% of what you throw is stew. I am not infallible.

What you do not understand, as well as what does not pass between your blinders, for you is "crap". 99% seems a reasonable number to me.

Thumbtack, there are a few drops left in the lemon! Bravo, it's crazy to see how contempt and hatred can trigger this kind of dazzling.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by Exnihiloest » 07/02/20, 19:03

GuyGadebois wrote:... it's crazy to see how contempt and hatred can trigger this kind of dazzling.

Congratulations for this start of introspection.
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadebois
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6532
Registration: 24/07/19, 17:58
Location: 04
x 982

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by GuyGadebois » 07/02/20, 19:11

Exnihiloest wrote:
GuyGadebois wrote:... it's crazy to see how contempt and hatred can trigger this kind of dazzling.

Congratulations for this start of introspection.

Don't make your tartuffe.
0 x
“It is better to mobilize your intelligence on bullshit than to mobilize your bullshit on intelligent things. (J.Rouxel)
"By definition the cause is the product of the effect". (Tryphion)
"360 / 000 / 0,5 is 100 million and not 72 million" (AVC)
User avatar
Paul72
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 684
Registration: 12/02/20, 18:29
Location: Sarthe
x 139

Re: Global warming: natural variability vs anthropogenic influence?




by Paul72 » 12/02/20, 19:33

"Skeptical" studies are taken into account when their methodology is not doubtful from a scientific point of view ... that should not make masses of them : Cheesy:
This is valid for any study: if the methodology is questionable, it is not retained regardless of the result
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Climate Change: CO2, warming, greenhouse effect ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 123 guests