New IPCC report is out

[_Res Ipsa]

Oh, NOW Res Ipsa finds his indignancy. ;)

- Doc

LOL. Amused, not indignant. ;)

[_subgenius]

Come on, this little ____ stain started it. Throwing his jowls around. He does this habitually, following me around on threads. He jumps in like a band groupie trying to impress those who he wishes were his friends. Does it to everyone. He has even sent me private messages in the past asking me to stop after he starts getting his ass handed to him, which takes about 5 seconds, because he can't handle it emotionally. But then he comes back and does it again.

Oh My God! Can we have a conversation on climate change yes or no?

I vote "no" because its boring and the hypocrisy of sitting in from of computer while senselessly using natural resources to argue about the senseless use of natural resources is unbearable.

[_DoubtingThomas]

Both of these are ____.

You are right! I shouldn't get down to his level! I am deleting it.

[_Kevin Graham]

Lindzen is not a credible voice on climate change. He published a couple of papers with contrarian theories that could not be replicated. His proposed magic iris that would open up to transport heat away from the surface never existed.

This versus this.

Richard Siegmund Lindzen (born February 8, 1940) is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry. He has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. From 1983[1] until his retirement in 2013, he was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.[2] He was a lead author of Chapter 7, "Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks," of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Third Assessment Report on climate change. He has criticized the scientific consensus about climate change[3] and what he has called "climate alarmism."[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen

Every field of science had its cranks and outliers. When you cite some guy’s Ph.D. thesis or op-Ed’s by fringe scientists, you are ignoring the actual science.

Have you been to grad school? If so then you understand how a thesis works. You are oddly dismissing the quality of this particular man's work, which I have seen no reason to be suspicious of, while simultaneously casting doubt over the whole institution. If this guy's Ph.D. is total rubbish, who's the say the other guys PhDs aren't as well?

Are you really so stupid that you didn't understand that Res Ipsa was saying "he published a couple of papers with contrarian theories" and not that he only published a couple of papers?

[_Water Dog]

How is it that members of the party of personal responsibility always blame others for their own crappy conduct? Man up, dude.

Ok, you're right. I'm sorry, DT. What I said was inappropriate. I pledge to play nice.

Oh My God! Can we have a conversation on climate change yes or no?

Please continue. Tell me about your equation.

[_Kevin Graham]

Hey, I’m not the one who suggested some guy’s Ph.D. thesis as a reason to doubt an enormous body of scientific evidence. If you want to claim that this guy is Galileo, then make the case.

Ever notice they always find that one guy who we're supposed to believe has it right and the thousands of others have it wrong? On gun studies their Lindzen is John Lott.

[_DoubtingThomas]

I thought it was only liberals that engaged in personal attack. Weird.

Come on, this little ____ stain started it. Throwing his jowls around. He does this habitually, following me around on threads. He jumps in like a band groupie trying to impress those who he wishes were his friends. Does it to everyone. He has even sent me private messages in the past asking me to stop after he starts getting his ass handed to him, which takes about 5 seconds, because he can't handle it emotionally. But then he comes back and does it again.

Are you done with the personal attacks? In your own words, what are the compelling arguments of Lindzen? Give me the details.

[_Water Dog]

Are you done with the personal attacks? In your own words, what are the compelling arguments of Lindzen? Give me the details.

No, let's not change the subject. You were just saying something about an equation.... please continue. I did answer your question, after all. I want to hear more about delta F.

[Guest]

Are you done with the personal attacks? In your own words, what are the compelling arguments of Lindzen? Give me the details.

No, let's not change the subject. You were just saying something about an equation.... please continue. I did answer your question, after all. I want to hear more about delta F.

I am just someone that blindly follows the scientists. You do your own research. So, you tell me. What is the radiative forcing when the CO2 levels are 405 parts per million?

and please explain in your own words why Lindzen's arguments are so compelling.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

and please explain in your own words why Lindzen's arguments are so compelling.

Dude. You're the one that dropped that alphabet equation on us. Explain it. Otherwise you risk looking like a poseur.

- Doctrine & Camenants