Skeptical scientist hijacks AOC Congressional climate hearing

[recapped]

Climate Statistician Dr. Caleb Rossiter to AOC Committee: "We are trying to save the people of the planet from the people 'saving the planet.'"

https://www.climatedepot.com/2019/05/01/skeptical-scientist-hijacks-aoc-congressional-climate-hearing-aoc-laments-were-not-debating-whether-climate-change-is-real/ https://www.climatedepot.com/2019/05/01/skeptical-scientist-hijacks-aoc-congressional-climate-hearing-aoc-laments-were-not-debating-whether-climate-change-is-real/

[sumdumguy]

Finally the CO2 Coalition is speaking up to the Climate Change fanatics. CO2 is the staff of life and has had positive influence on man. Stand up and be counted. You are brave souls because you may be burned at the stake by these lunatics.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

What a ridiculous combination of words. Skeptical Scientist. Scientists are supposed to be skeptical, that is how the scientific method works. That is how science moves forward and doesn't stagnate. Except in Chucks world where a few friends with no affiliation to the actual field just agree with each other, then demand that debate is prohibited.

[chuckChuck]

What a ridiculous combination of words. Skeptical Scientist. Scientists are supposed to be skeptical, that is how the scientific method works. That is how science moves forward and doesn't stagnate. Except in Chucks world where a few friends with no affiliation to the actual field just agree with each other, then demand that debate is prohibited.

A few friends?

Are Environment Canada, NASA, The National Oceanic the Atmospheric Association, The American Meteorological Society just a few friends that agree with each other that human caused climate change is real! LMAO Surely you can do better than that? Or maybe not!

I have never said debate is prohibited, but there is not much point debating with you when you never provide any actual climate science from a climate scientist or their organizations that counters that human caused climate change is real.

Still waiting!

[chuckChuck]

American Meteorological Society
https://www.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/about-ams/ams-and-climate-change/

AMS and Climate Change

Climate Change is among the most pressing issues facing the world today.

Humans are causing climate to change and it poses numerous serious risks. The more carbon we emit, the higher the carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere will be and the larger the changes in climate we'll face. Based on our current path, a child who is born today would, at age 30, breath air with roughly twice as much carbon dioxide as her great, great grandparents. And yet, we do not know how much carbon we can emit safely and we cannot know in advance when human-caused climate changes will lead to catastrophic societal consequences. We do know that we are seeing some of these consequences today, including increases in global temperatures, melting ice caps, and rising global sea levels.

These are conclusions based on multiple independent lines of evidence that have been gathered over decades of intensive scientific research. They are affirmed, and reaffirmed by numerous leading scientific institutions around the world, including AMS.

For example, the official AMS statement on Climate Change, reads in part, “Warming of the climate system now is unequivocal, according to many different kinds of evidence.” It goes on to say, “It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases …”

Similar conclusions have been reached by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the National Academies of more than 30 other countries, other scientific societies, including AGU and AAAS. We know of no scientific institution with relevant subject matter expertise that disagrees with these basic conclusions.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

And how do either of your responses In anyway address the issue I brought up of skepticism being A basic principle of science? Instead you just keep reinforcing your belief in consensus.

[furrowtickler]

What was that about NASA ???????


That horrible C02 eh ?

[Guest]

What was that about NASA ???????
g

That horrible C02 eh ?

You wont get a response to that furrow

[furrowtickler]

[recapped]

Shoot holes in this Chuck.

https://www.technocracy.news/tim-ball-the-evidence-proves-that-co2-is-not-a-greenhouse-gas/ https://www.technocracy.news/tim-ball-the-evidence-proves-that-co2-is-not-a-greenhouse-gas/

[fjlip]

Shoot holes in this Chuck.

https://www.technocracy.news/tim-ball-the-evidence-proves-that-co2-is-not-a-greenhouse-gas/ https://www.technocracy.news/tim-ball-the-evidence-proves-that-co2-is-not-a-greenhouse-gas/

Excellent rebuttal, obviously intelligence out there somewhere!
"The scientific method was not used with the AGW theory. In fact, the exact opposite occurred, they tried to prove the theory. It is a treadmill guaranteed to make you misread, misrepresent, misuse and selectively choose data and evidence. This is precisely what the IPCC did and continued to do."

What a shit show!