- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Your occasional reminder that global warming is real,
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:27 pm to LSUTigersVCURams
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:27 pm to LSUTigersVCURams
quote:
and caused by human emissions of greenhouse gasses.
Go outside you ignorant sluts. Record cold and record high temps in the same week.
Please explain to the class you empirical evidence that South Louisiana's recent change in Temperatures are 100% attributed to man-made global warming. If you can't, then you will ban yourself from posting again, ok?
0
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:28 pm to LSUTigersVCURams
1) weather is not climate
2) We know, without doubt, that NASA has been 'adjusting' historic temp data to fit the narrative
3) Get back with me when you can tell me what the globes temperature is supposed to be
2) We know, without doubt, that NASA has been 'adjusting' historic temp data to fit the narrative
3) Get back with me when you can tell me what the globes temperature is supposed to be
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:28 pm to redneck hippie
quote:
They trust Fox News more than scientists that have dedicated their lives to research
You call Bruce Jenner a woman. Let's not preach about Science, mmmkay?
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:30 pm to doubleb
quote:
BTW, Record temp for Jan 11 was 84 set in 1898.
Right in the middle of the industrial revolution. I bet smoke from those coal burning steam paddle boats were to blame.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:34 pm to ScottFowler
quote:Take another look at that graph
So, get that climate change crap off my lawn you hippie loser.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:38 pm to NC_Tigah
The graph that shows an underlying positive trend despite your best efforts to end it on a local minimum by arbitrarily cutting off in March 2011? Gosh, I wonder why you haven't updated it in six years. Let me help you out by pulling up the same data set (UAH) with the same 13-month rolling average. I'll even throw in a least-squares slope to give it that little extra spice. LINK
This is without even touching the difference between troposphere temps and surface temps.
This is without even touching the difference between troposphere temps and surface temps.
This post was edited on 1/12/17 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:41 pm to Balloon Huffer
You may be right. But what if you're wrong? What do we stand to lose by taking better care of the environment and not filling our atmosphere with chemicals?
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:42 pm to Iosh
Well, heck, if we're posting graphs of global temperatures I'll add mine, too.....
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:45 pm to Iosh
So are those models reflective and/or show a causal relationship to man made inputs? Or are they in line with a natural warming trend? It appears linear to me, unless I missed something and the 1860s was a boon for cow farts and fossil fuels.
This post was edited on 1/12/17 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:46 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
NC_Tigah
All of those peaks and valleys. It's as if weather is cyclical.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:46 pm to LSURussian
quote:If by "global" you mean Northern Europe and by "temperature" you mean tree rings. (Your graph is at the bottom of this post)
Well, heck, if we're posting graphs of global temperatures I'll add mine, too.....
LINK
Weird how dendro proxies are super-unreliable when skeptics take a (deserved) shite on Mann's papers but super-reliable when they yield the preferred outcome.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:47 pm to AUbagman
quote:
So are those models reflective and/or show a causal relationship to man made inputs? Or are they in line with a natural warming trend? It appears linear to me, unless I missed something and the 1860s was a boon for cow farts and fossil fuels.
BLASPHEMER!!!!!!
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:49 pm to Iosh
quote:
dendro proxies
What is this?
quote:
are super-unreliable
why's that?
quote:
when skeptics take a (deserved) shite on Mann's papers
Who's Mann, and who are his skeptics?
quote:
but super-reliable when they yield the preferred outcome.
So what are you arguing?
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:49 pm to AUbagman
The petroleum industry started in 1859, so yeah kindof
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:49 pm to BugAC
I've yet to see anyone answer this question:
So fricking what?
So fricking what?
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:51 pm to LSUTigersVCURams
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:51 pm to Iosh
Technology will move us off of a carbon-based energy economy in the next 50-75 years. This is all a moot point.
Any drastic changes we make will be horrible for our economy and have little to no affect on the problem (if there even is one).
So gas up and don't worry about it.
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:51 pm to AggieDub14
quote:
The petroleum industry started in 1859, so yeah kindof
And exactly how did it start? And when did the "coal industry" begin?
This post was edited on 1/12/17 at 2:52 pm
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:52 pm to AggieDub14
quote:
You may be right. But what if you're wrong? What do we stand to lose by taking better care of the environment and not filling our atmosphere with chemicals?
I don't think anyone is arguing against cleaner air and water. We're skeptical of the AL Gore led scare tactics on a man made global warming crisis. Most of us do not question a warming trend, as they are commonplace in Earth's history. Also, I happen to believe CO2 is essential to life, as I'm sure 100% of scientists and trees would agree. So yes, I welcome that chemical.
This post was edited on 1/12/17 at 2:53 pm
Posted on 1/12/17 at 2:52 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
I hope you're right
Page 5 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News