The science behind RHCs liver thread

[Angry_Physics]

Amazingly, @organic red is as thick as you, I never thought it possible 2 people could be that stupid given how few read this thread

400 years of solar activity and he says "snow in one winter" while pretending we were not told snow would disappear for 30 years

yep this has nothing to do with it, sure

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Angry_Physics]

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160127-will-snow-become-a-thing-of-the-past-as-the-climate-warms
"will-snow-become-a-thing-of-the-past-as-the-climate-warms"

30 years of this ****e

 

[Angry_Physics]

You must log in or register to see images

a decade later

You must log in or register to see images

You must log in or register to see images

Snow needs cold.. not warming, an overheating planet does not create more cold you dipshit

 

[Angry_Physics]

England's temperatures in the longest running record CET @astro you challenged numtpy

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Angry_Physics]

Milder winters, nope, 30 years of FAIL

You must log in or register to see images

 

[organic red]

Amazingly, @organic red is as thick as you, I never thought it possible 2 people could be that stupid given how few read this thread

400 years of solar activity and he says "snow in one winter" while pretending we were not told snow would disappear for 30 years

yep this has nothing to do with it, sure

You must log in or register to see images

Oooohh............I got some Sisu abuse
Morning mate ...........I don't remember hearing the 'no more snow' stuff. I do remember hearing that all forms of weather would be more
severe, which seems to be the case. You will not convince me there is nothing to worry about on this topic, I think we are in big trouble.
Anyway, you're an oil shill so..........

 

[astro]

"fossil fuel apologist" he says when he owes his health, edu, standard of living, ease of transport and the very device he uses to post online to fossil fuels [HASHTAG]#epicmoron[/HASHTAG]


So, why are you using fossil fuels you hypocrite? Why have you not gone back to 1850 living standards
"It's one step up from "how can there be global warming if we have more snow this winter"."
This from the man who said floods in the UK for last year was "global warming" How un-self aware are you [HASHTAG]#inconsistent[/HASHTAG] [HASHTAG]#contradictshimself[/HASHTAG]

FYI we were told for 30 years snow would be a thing of the past and winters will be milder... forget that did you

I also note you have no rebuttal, just a label and nonsense


Those that use fossil fuels while complaining about them are ******ed hypocrites

No point in rebutting you since there are numerous sources out there you could find yourself if you put even 10 seconds of thought into investigating it.

Instead you go [HASHTAG]#fullsisu[/HASHTAG] and resort to insults while doubling down on posting links to anti-science nonsense as if it increases your credibility rather than absolutely demolishing it.

 

[Angry_Physics]

No point in rebutting you since there are numerous sources out there you could find yourself if you put even 10 seconds of thought into investigating it.

Instead you go [HASHTAG]#fullsisu[/HASHTAG] and resort to insults while doubling down on posting links to anti-science nonsense as if it increases your credibility rather than absolutely demolishing it.

[HASHTAG]#talkshite[/HASHTAG] New radio show.

Brain dead cabbage Pretending you are not a massive hypocrite by ignoring the glaring hypocrisy. Pretending the failed 3 decades of predictions based on the theory never happened. If your predictions are wrong, your theory is wrong, you anti science nitwit

Pretending you didnt claim the floods a few years ago was "global warming" while then claiming I say a snowy year means no global warming [HASHTAG]#******[/HASHTAG]

Only a ****** says "fossil fuel apologist" while said ****** enjoys the benefits of fossil fuels, you stupid ****

 

[astro]

[HASHTAG]#talkshite[/HASHTAG] New radio show.

Brain dead cabbage Pretending you are not a massive hypocrite by ignoring the glaring hypocrisy. Pretending the failed 3 decades of predictions based on the theory never materialised

Pretending you didnt claim the floods a few years ago was "global warming" while then claiming I say a snowy year means no global warming [HASHTAG]#******[/HASHTAG]

Only a ****** says "fossil fuel apologist" while said ****** enjoys the benefits of fossil fuels, you stupid ****

Take a pill and stay away from dem clouds

 

[Angry_Physics]

Take a pill and stay away from dem clouds

Loser talk That's literally all you have You scientifically illiterate potato

 

[Angry_Physics]

Who knew a better correlation for temperatures than CO2 would [HASHTAG]#trigger[/HASHTAG] @astro The illiterate had to bring it down to the level of eco mut loons and tin foil hat conspiracy theories of fossil fuel apologists, while might I add using fossil fuels to vent his illiterate rage

 

[Angry_Physics]

Skeptical science, @astro go to guys for [HASHTAG]#science[/HASHTAG]

You must log in or register to see images

Solar Irradiance is not "solar activity", irradiance is but one aspect of solar activity They don't show which temperature time series that is either as there are 8 of them [HASHTAG]#antisciencefrauds[/HASHTAG]

 

[astro]

Skeptical science, @astro go to guys for [HASHTAG]#science[/HASHTAG]

You must log in or register to see images

Solar Irradiance is not "solar activity", irradiance is but one aspect of solar activity They don't show which temperature data set that is either as there are 8 [HASHTAG]#antisciencefrauds[/HASHTAG]

So tell us what type of solar activity other than the actual light is responsible for the increase in temperature. Or is the temperature increase itself fake, in which case why are you even talking about solar activity causing it?

[HASHTAG]#sortyourstoryout[/HASHTAG]

 

[organic red]

Who knew a better correlation for temperatures than CO2 would [HASHTAG]#trigger[/HASHTAG] @astro The illiterate had to bring it down to the level of eco mut loons and tin foil hat conspiracy theories of fossil fuel apologists, while might I add using fossil fuels to vent his illiterate rage

Were all dependant on fossil fuels in some way, its unavoidable

 

[Angry_Physics]

So tell us what type of solar activity other than the actual light is responsible for the increase in temperature. Or is the temperature increase itself fake, in which case why are you even talking about solar activity causing it?

[HASHTAG]#sortyourstoryout[/HASHTAG]

It's like you never heard of "solar variation", look it up you illiterate. solar magnetic variation, then there is the cycle variations in extreme UV (which effects Ozone levels) for example. Then there is heliosphere variation, solar wind pressure, all of while also affect earth, just some of the changes in cycles. Solar magnetic activity also affects the jet stream..

When you say temperature, what do you mean? Do you mean a specific time series or do you mean average measurement of kinetic energy.. "temperature" in this context is meaningless

You have not a clue of that which struggle in vein to speak of

It's like talking to a cat about things 14 year olds understand

 

[Angry_Physics]

Were all dependant on fossil fuels in some way, its unavoidable

Ah re convenience, no one has to drive, or fly away on holidays, no one has to brush their teeth with oil based plastic tooth brushes, no one has to use plastic bottles, no one has to buy stuff shipped in from a thousand miles away, no one has to own an iphone or Android, no one has to own a TV, no one has to do a lot of things that they do using fossil fuels to make life convenient.

Don't agree with you one jot, apologist crap, you DONT HAVE to post here using fossil fuels. lmfao

The climate scientists dont have to fly biz class all over the world do they? not with modern networks, the UN does not HAVE to have 1200 private jets fly to climate parties like Cancun and Morocco

and if you read the "commitments" in the climate Paris Accord, no one committed **** all bar the US under Obama, India and China agreed to **** all

 

[astro]

It's like you never heard of "solar variation", look it up you illiterate. solar magnetic variation, then there is the cycle variations in extreme UV (which effects Ozone levels) for example. Then there is heliosphere variation, solar wind pressure, all of while also affect earth, just some of the changes in cycles. Solar magnetic activity also affects the jet stream..

When you say temperature, what do you mean? Do you mean a specific time series or do you mean average measurement of kinetic energy.. "temperature" in this context is meaningless

You have not a clue of that which struggle in vein to speak of

It's like talking to a cat about things 14 year olds understand

EUV is part of solar irradiance

 

[Angry_Physics]

EUV is part of solar irradiance

No one said EUV wasn't and it varies and has an impact other than energy balance, which is what the "light" v "temperature" debate is about.

That's all you have to say huh.. one wonders why you blame floods on our 0.00001 mole fraction CO2 addition to the atmosphere when you really don't know anything at all about it, and rely on "muh authority", while not even realising there are thousands of papers that throw doubt on the claims that the theory is 1 valid and 2 a danger

After all this nonsense came from the incorrect theory on why Venus is hot, if we talk forcing and energy balance, Mar's atmosphere, is 95% CO2, it's atmosphere is thinner but it's layer of CO2 is thicker than earth's, so.. by the theoretical model set out for it on earth, mars should be constantly warming up for millions of years.. and yet.. there is 0 evidence of that.

 

[astro]

No one said EUV wasn't and it varies and has an impact other than energy balance, which is what the "light" v "temperature" debate is about.

That's all you have to say huh.. one wonders why you blame floods on our 0.00001 mole fraction CO2 addition to the atmosphere when you really don't know anything at all about it, and rely on "muh authority", while not even realising there are thousands of papers that throw doubt on the claims that the theory is 1 valid and 2 a danger

After all this nonsense came from the incorrect theory on why Venus is hot, if we talk forcing and energy balance, Mar's atmosphere, is 95% CO2, it's atmosphere is thinner but it's layer of CO2 is thicker than earth's, so.. by the theoretical model set out for it on earth, mars should be constantly warming up for millions of years.. and yet.. there is 0 evidence of that.

You said solar irradiance wasn't the only solar activity as an excuse for why the data shows no correlation between global temperature and solar irradiance. So I asked what type of solar activity you think is responsible for the temperature increase. You said EUV, which is part of solar irradiance.

[HASHTAG]#sortyourstoryout[/HASHTAG]

 

[Angry_Physics]

You said solar irradiance wasn't the only solar activity as an excuse for why the data shows no correlation between global temperature and solar irradiance. So I asked what type of solar activity you think is responsible for the temperature increase. You said EUV, which is part of solar irradiance.

[HASHTAG]#sortyourstoryout[/HASHTAG]

Gibberish, EUV variation affects the atmosphere in other ways than energy balance, so it's effect is outside of rad in rad out balance, trying to cover your ignorance.
You had to google EUV as well, you moron

Everything you are posting is something you google after you read my post and ignore all of the inconvenient truths. [HASHTAG]#TobesMKII[/HASHTAG] [HASHTAG]#outofyourdepth[/HASHTAG] [HASHTAG]#Sad[/HASHTAG]