On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > > What the hell are you talking about? Seriously. What are you talking about? > > According to this - > https://www2.ucar.edu/climate/faq/how-much-has-global-temperature-risen-last-100-years > - it has gone up about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit between 1880 and 2012. Is > that more than 'a bit'? I don't really know, but a lot of people who know > more about climate science than I do seem to think it is. >
Over the last 500 years temperatures have fluctuated up and down within a range of 2C That's a bit and it's normal > Have you even looked at data about this - and I mean anything before the > '80's'. As far as I can tell, the data pretty much shows that the average > temperature is higher now than it was when we started keeping records. Do > you dispute that? If so, please feel free to supply data that shows this is > not the case. You're taking a snapshot of data again yet you claim change takes hundreds of years.Yes the temperature is likely higher now than it was in the 1880's. That doesn't mean it's warmer than the medieval warming period, or many other cycles in history. > I used to think that you were skeptical that humans were the cause (or even > contributed to) these climate changes now it seems you are denying that the > climate has changed at all. Climate always changes, it's about time you realized that. I'm saying the science isn't settled and there's no consensus. > I love how climate science deniers always use the ' is it 'warming' > 'change' or 'disruption'? Until you can agree on a name for it, I won;t > listen' argument. You don't get it. They have to change the name because the silly facts force them to. > Once again, showing that the scientific method and how it > is used seems to be lost on you. What scientific method are you using to back up your claim? You don't have one, you're reading from DNC TPM. > I would expect our knowledge of the > consequences of the rising average temperature to change over time as we > get better technology to model the events, and, when we actually get data > when stuff happens. Just because a theory of the consequences of climate > change did not pan out, does not mean the climate change is not happening. When every test fails it's time to create one that works, not hide the facts and claim a consensus. . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:370766 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
