Tineash wrote:So why is most of the thread dedicated to disproving the presence of any global warming? If there's no warming, why amend GW to AGW?
You need to do your homework, fella.
Cal's position is and always has been that his only opposition is to the idea of
Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming.
That is, that the world is warming as a result of man activities and that this is going to lead to a significant enough shift in the climate of the planet to cause specific environmental issues of a destructive nature.
For instance, he has never denied that warming is taking place.
...
This is true. But it’s also a bit of a cop-out. After all, as most of us are now aware, there has been no ‘global warming’ since 1998, which is when the curve on the graph goes flat. In the eternally moving battlefield of claim and counter-claim in the great climate change debate, even the fervently warmist Professor Phil Jones – of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit – concedes that there has been no ‘statistically significant warming’ since 1995. In the simplest, human terms, therefore, no one younger than 14 years old has experienced global warming. So why does our Government go on acting as if it’s a major problem? Why all these hugely expensive commitments to ‘decarbonisation’ and ‘renewable energy’? Why all the eco-taxes on our holiday flights and wind-farms – if the supposed threat they were designed to avert now turns out to be unsupported by real-world evidence?
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7258&p=2632712&hilit=1998#p2632712Erm, well, he certainly never denied that humans were responsible.
Cal wrote:My position remains thus: MMCC is NOT 'settled' or 'proven' despite what any government minister claims, any scientists claims.
Cal wrote:HERE are the 100 reasons, released in a dossier issued by the European Foundation, why climate change is natural and not man-made:
Cal wrote:As a MMCC heretic (and f*cking proud of it)
Cal wrote:...funnelled into the pockets of those pimping MMCC and all its deceptions.
Cal wrote: imagined 'man-made' climate change
Cal wrote:The BBC discovers that not everyone shares their illogical, if politically correct, enthusiasm for pro-AGW propaganda.
Cal wrote:show me the proof that the climate change we are currently experiencing (and nobody doubts that it is happening) is attributable to man's activities.
Cal wrote:AGW - and unproven theory?
SUPER MEGA BULLSHIT BONUS.
A year ago, I posted this;
All reliable sources seem to point to a number of things;
CO2 levels are rising.
CO2 is a principle greenhouse gas.
Global temperatures are rising.
Human output has created a sustained increase in CO2 levels across the last century.
Therefore, as the theory goes (yes, a theory, but a scientific one, please understand the definition (unless you want this to descend into a debate over Popperian terminology which, at this point, would actually be a far more interesting read than another ten pages of point-rebuttal-denial-initial point again)) increased human CO2 output has led to change in global climate.
To which you replied;
I can't help you. You stopped listening a long time ago to anything that doesn't chime with your propaganda.
Oh gooseberry fool, he denied both those things.
Ah well, now he
a)admits the planet is warming
b)admits mankind have played a role
He just denies that anything, y'know, bad is going to happen.