[split] Greenhouse Effect Theory exposed as mathematical wizzardy

[Sunsettommy]

JohnWho writes,

Quote:Maybe I'm just a bit naive, but from what I've gathered regarding "GW" conversations, most real "skeptics" simply want honest, quality science and where it takes us and what it shows simply is what it is.

I agree with this reasonable statement.

Too bad AGW believers are not interested in such quality.Since they make all kinds of absurd rationalizations,on the failure of their few semi testable claims.They keep going around and around with the same few feeble counter arguments.So absurd that even I can see them clearly.

They have NO new arguments to offer.And that is a sign of a crumbling position they have been advocating for many years.When they depend on stale debunked arguments.They have nothing left.

In the last two years.WE have seen a growing number of science papers being published.That make effective case AGAINST the AGW hypothesis.

It is the unceasing science research being published shedding new light.That continues to further define what we know.And what we need to learn what we need to know.That is why the AGW camp are losing their arguments.They run on one thing and the continuing science research is not supporting it.

I am one,who hunger for the better days of the now distant past.Where there were far more independent science research going on.Where there was minimal to no politically organized bias.To unduly influence the outcome of science research.

Quote:No misrepresentations, no manipulations, no falsifying of data, no half-truths, no misleading statements - just findings that "actually follows the laws of physics".

If we are warming, then we are warming. If we are cooling, we are cooling. If we are putting additional CO2 into the atmosphere, then we are putting additional CO2 into the atmosphere. If CO2 in the atmosphere has any influence - either cooling or warming - then it does. If it is a measurable influence, then measure it.

It is a good statement because we MUST follow the evidence.But it can take a while for the minority view of something that is controversial.To have a chance to succeed.IF it is a better explanation than the current one.

It took FIFTY years for the Geology field to finally embrace the main conclusions of one man.J. Harlan Bretz.

Patience is required.

[JohnWho]

Interestingly, WUWT guest poster Peter Wood, seems to agree with us, SST.

New Term fromthe Chronicle - Climate Thuggery

[Sunsettommy]

Post 1 here is a reply to POST 6