Climate continues to change.

[von_Bismarck]

Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard': scientists

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1QE1ZU

OSLO (Reuters) - Evidence for man-made global warming has reached a "gold standard" level of certainty, adding pressure for cuts in greenhouse gases to limit rising temperatures, scientists said on Monday.

"Humanity cannot afford to ignore such clear signals," the U.S.-led team wrote in the journal Nature Climate Change of satellite measurements of rising temperatures over the past 40 years.

They said confidence that human activities were raising the heat at the Earth's surface had reached a "five-sigma" level, a statistical gauge meaning there is only a one-in-a-million chance that the signal would appear if there was no warming.

Of course, tryfail can still be counted on to play defense for the hydrocarbon industry.

 

[Que]

Oh, shit just got "real."

One would think that the naysayers would be silenced when they were told that the science was "settled."

Taking it to the totally-a-thing scientific "gold standard" level is. . .something else.

Evidence of "warming' =/= evidence of "man-made global warming"

 

[von_Bismarck]

Oh, shit just got "real."

One would think that the naysayers would be silenced when they were told that the science was "settled."

Taking it to the totally-a-thing scientific "gold standard" level is. . .something else.

Five sigma statistical significance has been referred to as the gold standard of proof for scientific discovery since long before the present context, you nitwit.

 

[Que]

I'll hold out for platinum level certitude, thanks.

Just in case that comes to fruition or do we have plans ready to go to invade China and India to stop those bastards from polluting the Earth with carbon dioxide?

 

[Que]

Sure seems weird for an HV AC contractor who worships at the Holy Church of Climate Alarmism and living in sunny Houston, Canada not to have solar panels on his roof.

Wonder if the "wife" is driving an electric bus?

 

[gunthernehmen]

Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard': scientists

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1QE1ZU

OSLO (Reuters) - Evidence for man-made global warming has reached a "gold standard" level of certainty, adding pressure for cuts in greenhouse gases to limit rising temperatures, scientists said on Monday.

"Humanity cannot afford to ignore such clear signals," the U.S.-led team wrote in the journal Nature Climate Change of satellite measurements of rising temperatures over the past 40 years.

They said confidence that human activities were raising the heat at the Earth's surface had reached a "five-sigma" level, a statistical gauge meaning there is only a one-in-a-million chance that the signal would appear if there was no warming.

Of course, tryfail can still be counted on to play defense for the hydrocarbon industry.

Reuters must have quoted the Onion by accident.

Not one word in that article pointed to a FACT. It amounted to, "We're really, REALLY certain now! Honest!"

Nobody (sane) would dispute that climate changes. What is in dispute is, 1) is it caused by mankind's activities (and to what "degree") and 2) does it really matter, since nobody, ESPECIALLY the liberals, is willing to do a damned thing about it?

 

[von_Bismarck]

It's a Reuters article. If you want the source, try looking here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0424-x.

 

[phrodeau]

Oh, shit just got "real."

One would think that the naysayers would be silenced when they were told that the science was "settled."

Taking it to the totally-a-thing scientific "gold standard" level is. . .something else.

Evidence of "warming' =/= evidence of "man-made global warming"

I'll hold out for platinum level certitude, thanks.

Just in case that comes to fruition or do we have plans ready to go to invade China and India to stop those bastards from polluting the Earth with carbon dioxide?

Sure seems weird for an HV AC contractor who worships at the Holy Church of Climate Alarmism and living in sunny Houston, Canada not to have solar panels on his roof.

Wonder if the "wife" is driving an electric bus?

Wow, three solid gold arguments there. You’re a master debater.

 

[gunthernehmen]

It's a Reuters article. If you want the source, try looking here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0424-x.

That explains the poor writing.

Your link is to a pay site. Not spending $8 on an Op Ed.

 

[InsightRiot]

Wow, three solid gold arguments there. You’re a master debater.

He is arguing with retards, so he has to lower himself to your level.

 

[von_Bismarck]

He is arguing with retards, so he has to lower himself to your level.

Were you asphyxiated as a child?

 

[InsightRiot]

Were you asphyxiated as a child?

No, I didn't die as a child.

Perhaps you meant to say "anoxic brain injury"?

lol, good job at your insult fail, tard.

 

[von_Bismarck]

No, I didn't die as a child.

Perhaps you meant to say "anoxic brain injury"?

lol, good job at your insult fail, tard.

No, I'm implying that you're brain dead.

 

[texasj65]

Someone give me a call when the climate stops changing

 

[gunthernehmen]

Someone give me a call when the climate stops changing

Don't hold your breath. It'll still be changing millions of years after we wipe out the human race.

 

[trysail]

New Santer Study: 97% Consensus Is Now 99.99997%


by Roy W. Spencer, Ph.D.

"...While it’s nice that the authors commemorate 40 years of satellite temperature monitoring method (which John Christy and I originally developed), I’m dismayed that this published result could feed a new “one in a million” meme that rivals the “97% of scientists agree” meme, which has been a very successful talking point for politicians, journalists, and liberal arts majors.

John Christy and I examined the study to see just what was done. I will give you the bottom line first, in case you don’t have time to wade through the details:

The new Santer et al. study merely shows that the satellite data have indeed detected warming (not saying how much) that the models can currently only explain with increasing CO2 (since they cannot yet reproduce natural climate variability on multi-decadal time scales)..."​

much more (but only if you're truly interested in actual science and statistics rather than Santer's propaganda bullshit)...

​

​

 

[Que]

Wow, three solid gold arguments there. You’re a master debater.

You have a rebuttal to "evidence of warming =/= evidence of man-made warming?"

As pointed out in Trysail's piece...finding what you expect to find based on assumptions you made is not news.

 

[RobDownSouth]

dupe?

......

 

[RobDownSouth]

Were you asphyxiated as a child?

No, I didn't die as a child.

Perhaps you meant to say "anoxic brain injury"?

lol, good job at your insult fail, tard.

I believe he was referring to your legendary "underdeveloped lungs".

 

[Que]

Triggered as fuck.

S o m e b o d y didn't like the reference to his growly widdle (tucked) tummy.

 

[Que]

Looks like you doubled down on obsession. How long have you been hanging on to that little morsel?

The judges would also have accepted "underdeveloped lungs".

I believe he was referring to your legendary "underdeveloped lungs".

Your first (not a "dupe") attempt was better. Although... to be fair: both show your virulent sociopathy equally well.

 

[von_Bismarck]

You have a rebuttal to "evidence of warming =/= evidence of man-made warming?"

As pointed out in Trysail's piece...finding what you expect to find based on assumptions you made is not news.

The analysis about statistical significance was specifically about anthropogenic global warming, numbnuts.

 

[Que]

The analysis about statistical significance was specifically about anthropogenic global warming, numbnuts.

. . .based on models that REQUIRE that CO2 is the only causation, no-nuts.

Remember when you used to be able to trot out that handy dandy guide to refudiate any climate change points that were made?...When that became outdated you've done nothing but bluster, since. You haven't had the balls to utter one word in support of climate alarmism using your root account because you really have no idea, Chum.

 

[von_Bismarck]

. . .based on models that REQUIRE that CO2 is the only causation, no-nuts.

Wrong. Try again.

 

[Que]

Wrong. Try again.

Wrong about me being wrong.

Your gratuitous assertion is hereby gratuitously denied.

Try again.