My latest response to Potholer and a repeat of my challenge for him to follow through with the live debate he agreed to. @ScottAdamsSayshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XycF0uCuByQ …
-
-
You think all climatologists accept the AGW hypothesis? There are many who do not. They have reasons....
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
When your pay check depends on it you’ll fail to notice what ever is required
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It is what is in their language regarding their models. If you describe the world starting from CO2 control knob effect + feedback effect, this is what needs to be discussed. It is a shortcut method if you don't calculate from first principles because that is really really hard.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"..future warming is likely to be substantially lower than the central computer model-simulated level projected by the (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), and highly unlikely to exceed that level." https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/global-warming-computer-models-co2-emissions/ …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Potholer outlined a theory where a tiny effect from orbital cycles causes a large amount of feedback, which accelerates like a teeter totter until it crashes down into the floor. There is no floor. With a gain of greater than one for the feedback, Earth becomes Venus or Pluto.
-
So where does all the Venus-like carbon come from? Are we creating matter from nothing now?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But Scott. People whose income depends on maintaining the narrative will do what it takes to put food on the table... Science has been bought off, like every single other trade. Government sets the rules. It's their agenda.
-
Money biases science, of course. But some of the criticisms of climate science are as crazy as the prediction models.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Wegener's theory of Continental Drift was obviously correct from day one, but it took mainstream science 60 years to accept it. My geology professor Bob Dietz at ASU was one of the people who finally broke the deadlock. Gave me a good understanding of how group think works.
-
imagine if there were government contracts related to "no continental drift."
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.