northwest NASA Climate 'Skeptics' Respond with Science! Just Kidding.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Friday January 20 2017 03:54:21 AEDT AM
Home Help Login Register
News: forum firewall bad behaviour Cloudflare Bot scout
Welcome to the Australianelectronicgoldprospectingforum founded in July 2010, an add free totally independent forum with over 70 boards and paid for and managed by the Admin.Total forum Topics:8,578 Total forum Posts:40,000 Members: 612 Total page views:7,258,084 Admin and  forum and domain name owner :marjen at Guests can only see a limited number of boards at present and cannot see any links. Guest cannot post and never will be permitted too!Registration of new members must be approved by admin.Anyone known to have any past or present association with Codan/ML or acting on their behalf as a proxy or intermediary  will not have their registration approved. All  original Photos and posts and  original materials displayed on this site are COPYRIGHTED and remain the property of the poster and the All messages on this forum express the personal views of the author and should not be interpreted as necessarily being in accord with those of the forum owner and neither the owner of this forum and its domain name nor SMF or the forum software developers or the forum host shall be held responsible for the content of any message. Admin reserves the right to remove any offensive or objectionable posts. No defamatory material or politics/religion or issues of race will be permitted.
QED coming soon!
Goldsearch Australia has been appointed the Australian Distributor for the QED.Check their website after  Wed 7th Dec 2016.
Global temperature goes from heat record to heat record, yet the sun is at its dimmest for half a century.
What is empirical  evidence?
Empirical evidence is information acquired by observation or experimentation. This data is recorded and analyzed by scientists and is a central process as part of the scientific method. Why is everything posted on climate by Inhere always horseshit?
Poor old  Inhere on finders still does not know the difference between weather and climate!The silly old goat seems to think because some places have recently had very cold weather that this brings into question  AGW!  Only right wing rabble rubbish climate deniers like horseshit Inhere don't  seem to understand  that AGW will mean that some regions of the earth will become colder!

australian electronic gold prospecting  |  Off topic  |  Off topic  |  Climate change  |  Topic: NASA Climate 'Skeptics' Respond with Science! Just Kidding. 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: NASA Climate 'Skeptics' Respond with Science! Just Kidding.  (Read 304 times)
Revered Supreme Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 14903

« on: Monday April 23 2012 14:49:29 AEST PM »

NASA Climate 'Skeptics' Respond with Science! Just Kidding.
The Signatories
"Obviously this letter first gained attention because the signatories are former NASA employees.  They are being touted as "top astronauts, scientists, and engineers" and "NASA experts, with more than 1000 years of combined professional experience."  Okay, but in what fields does their expertise lie?
Based on the job titles listed in the letter signatures, by my count they include 23 administrators, 8 astronauts, 7 engineers, 5 technicians, and 4 scientists/mathematicians of one sort or another (none of those sorts having the slightest relation to climate science).  Amongst the signatories and their 1,000 years of combined professional experience, that appears to include a grand total of zero hours  shocked of climate research experience, and zero peer-reviewed  shocked climate science papers. shocked"  

Response from NASA Chief Scientist Waleed Abdalati to Letter on NASA Climate Studies
You have to do better than this Inhere! NASA by the way has 18,000 employees!
New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism?
No, new data does not “blow a gaping hole in global warming alarmism”
Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedback
Old skeptic story that is simply wrong because “Spencer’s model is "unrealistic", "flawed", and "incorrect". As ThinkProgress points out, a geochemist has shown that Spencer’s models are irretrievably flawed, "don’t make any physical sense", and that Spencer has a track record in using such flawed analysis to draw any conclusion he wants.”
Roy Spencer’s Great Blunder
Inhere when are you going to post some real peer reviewed evidence from climate scientist rather than the rubbish from  skeptic blogs and non peer reviewed journals?
We still are waiting for you or the Coota skeptic to come up with any natural forcings that can explain all the observations and account for the AGW signatures.Put up some peer reviewed climate science to show us that the IPCC and the overwhelming majority of climate scientists have got it all put up or shut up!
Also worth noting that some of these Ex NASA employees have been invited to attend a Heartland  Institute conference on climate change in may!I wonder if any are receiving any money or support from the HI?
Inside the dark Heartland of climate denialism
doug smile


All posts on this forum are the personal views of the author and should  not necessarily be  interpreted as those of Admin The QED contains NO patented or protected IP!!! No fake users on this site! This forum does not depend on  guest posting liars to survive!1/2 wit powerless to login and post! LO
invited members
Senior Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1791

« Reply #1 on: Monday April 23 2012 20:06:38 AEST PM »

Constant and growing environment polluting cannot be excused by science.

This is crime against humanity, not science.

Global capital is ruining your life?
You have right to self-defence!
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 3916

« Reply #2 on: Monday April 23 2012 20:15:17 AEST PM »


Constant and growing environment polluting cannot be excused by science.

This is crime against humanity, not science.

POLLUTION is UNCOVERED & EXPLAINED BY SCIENCE, not excused or endorsed by science.
Industry & commercial interests ("market forces") may find reasons (costs, eroding profit etc) to overlook reality.

Perhaps this is what you meant.

Views expressed are without prejudice, moderation, in the public / consumer interest & their "right to know"! He reserves his right to: think freely & speculate, make mistakes & change his mind, even play with the nutters & "fairies". Prove me wrong 0.543! Still fighting greed & injustice my way :-)
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
australian electronic gold prospecting  |  Off topic  |  Off topic  |  Climate change  |  Topic: NASA Climate 'Skeptics' Respond with Science! Just Kidding. « previous next »
Jump to:  

Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder

BisdakworldClassic design by JV PACO-IN
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!