Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="av8torntn" data-source="post: 1276988" data-attributes="member: 8259">How do you figure that quotes from scientists refuting their own work is me trying to pass off something as science. You obviously are trying very hard so I&#039;ll play your game for you.<a href="http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/hadcrut3-global-last-15-years/" target="_blank">Non variance adjusted data showing no climate change for last 15 years</a>. It actually shows a slight decrease in global temperatures and is taken directly from the data you wish to debate.<a href="http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/climate-denier-phil-jones-reports-no-temperature-change-for-sixteen-years/" target="_blank">Variance adjusted shows no change in global temperatures.</a><a href="http://www.sciencebob.com/sciencefair/scientificmethod.php" target="_blank">The scientific method for those that feel there should be no debate in science.</a><a href="http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v2/n8/abs/ngeo578.html" target="_blank">Abstract of a paper challenging the link of carbon emissions to global warming.</a>The point is that I can link to articles for days but you guys are not really interested. I&#039;ve had one poster devolve into name calling, one quit, so what&#039;s your move? The apparent problem for you is if you acknowledge any of these even to try and disprove them you implicitly imply that the science isn&#039;t settled.<a href="http://judithcurry.com/2013/10/10/the-stadium-wave/" target="_blank">This is a well known paper for those that have an open mind on the subject(not that I agree or disagree with it more to the point that the science isn&#039;t settled)</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="av8torntn, post: 1276988, member: 8259"] How do you figure that quotes from scientists refuting their own work is me trying to pass off something as science. You obviously are trying very hard so I'll play your game for you. [URL='http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/hadcrut3-global-last-15-years/']Non variance adjusted data showing no climate change for last 15 years[/URL]. It actually shows a slight decrease in global temperatures and is taken directly from the data you wish to debate. [URL='http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/climate-denier-phil-jones-reports-no-temperature-change-for-sixteen-years/']Variance adjusted shows no change in global temperatures.[/URL] [URL='http://www.sciencebob.com/sciencefair/scientificmethod.php']The scientific method for those that feel there should be no debate in science.[/URL] [URL='http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v2/n8/abs/ngeo578.html']Abstract of a paper challenging the link of carbon emissions to global warming.[/URL] The point is that I can link to articles for days but you guys are not really interested. I've had one poster devolve into name calling, one quit, so what's your move? The apparent problem for you is if you acknowledge any of these even to try and disprove them you implicitly imply that the science isn't settled. [URL='http://judithcurry.com/2013/10/10/the-stadium-wave/']This is a well known paper for those that have an open mind on the subject(not that I agree or disagree with it more to the point that the science isn't settled)[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification