Scientists are wrong half the time!!

Blues63

Moderator
Dec 2014
14,657
12,431
Mustafa
You don't understand that the computer models ARE tested, against the real world. Presumably, if we had a nuclear holocaust, all the sides would be targeting major cities, no? Do yo have ANY idea of how much black SOOT that would loft into our atmosphere, blocking sunlight in the process? We can certainly model how much agricultural yields would fall under such circumstances. There'd be all kinds of very nasty chemicals in the atmosphere, as well, when you think about all the plastic junk in EVERY city nowadays.

You're just a private, not even first class, in the War Against Science that millions of Americans are waging.

You're being baited.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigLeRoy
Nov 2015
8,514
2,911
UK
I DID watch the video. All 21 boring minutes of it. Aside from a few comments about coral reefs in the first four minutes of your video, there was NO scientific content in that video, whatsoever. The last 16 minutes of it was just this disgruntled former professor who got himself fired. There was CERTAINLY nothing in the video that refuted man-made climate change, and certainly nothing that debunked any of the factual claims that Lunchboxxy made in her post, which you could actually learn something from, if only you were so inclined.

It does not speak well of you that you thought that video "debunks all the crap the climateers claim", because there was nothing, and I mean NOTHING, in the video, that did any such thing.
As expected.
 

HayJenn

Former Staff
Jul 2014
72,406
63,476
CA
Peter Rudd??

An expert panel led by the former chief scientist Ian Chubb has warned ministers that controversial scientist Peter Ridd is misrepresenting robust science about the plight of the Great Barrier Reef, and compared his claims to the strategy used by the tobacco industry to raise doubt about the impact of smoking.

The warning, in a letter to the federal environment minister, Sussan Ley, and the Queensland premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, follows Ridd launching a lecture tour in which he has repeated his claim that farmland pollution does not significantly damage the natural wonder.

Ridd’s tour has been supported by rightwing commentators and sugarcane industry managers campaigning against proposed state regulations limiting sediment and chemical runoff on the reef coast.

Great Barrier Reef expert panel says Peter Ridd misrepresenting science

Looks like all the anti-climate deniers here get duped, over and over again.

Probably because the know zero about the actual science behind Climate Change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigLeRoy

CtC

Mar 2019
11,947
4,268
California
Peter Rudd??

An expert panel led by the former chief scientist Ian Chubb has warned ministers that controversial scientist Peter Ridd is misrepresenting robust science about the plight of the Great Barrier Reef, and compared his claims to the strategy used by the tobacco industry to raise doubt about the impact of smoking.

The warning, in a letter to the federal environment minister, Sussan Ley, and the Queensland premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, follows Ridd launching a lecture tour in which he has repeated his claim that farmland pollution does not significantly damage the natural wonder.

Ridd’s tour has been supported by rightwing commentators and sugarcane industry managers campaigning against proposed state regulations limiting sediment and chemical runoff on the reef coast.

Great Barrier Reef expert panel says Peter Ridd misrepresenting science

Looks like all the anti-climate deniers here get duped, over and over again.

Probably because the know zero about the actual science behind Climate Change.
Nobody is getting duped. In the 1970's ,it was Global FREEZING. These phony Scientist are after Grant money.
 

StanStill

Former Staff
Dec 2013
13,743
15,761
Work
Nobody is getting duped. In the 1970's ,it was Global FREEZING. These phony Scientist are after Grant money.
So are you being serious now? It’s hard to tell if you’re joking, because your delivery is so deadpan. Funny either way, really.