We're pretty sure this counts as Nice Time, or something close to it: The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI), the pro-science group that challenges pseudoscience and paranormal claims, has challenged the climate-change deniers at the Heartland Institute, which loves telling the world that climate change is all just a big hoax and that there's been no global warming since 1998,
No actually. It just means the air can't hold anymore water vapor. It means when you sweat, it won't evaporate. The air temp has to drop in order for the air to release the vapor as rain. The quicker and farther it drops, the harder it rains.
Let's see...anti-vaxers are willing to bet their kids' (and other people's) health on pseudoscience. When it comes to ideology, people don't behave rationally.
Isn't it obvious? 97% of climate scientists are willing to risk their reputations to fraudulently present data to sustain their narcissistic need to feed on adulation and fame.
Nuh uh! The NASA/NOAA models are shown lacking by longitudinal studies. A list of temperature readings from the roof of the Bulgarian Barber College on Breitbart - it's academic AND published. Dumb lie-bruls!
The thing with Congress is that if youve got a Gerrymandered district, your competitors are all as nutty as you are so the Kochs get you at a discount. It costs more to buy someone from a competitive district.
I think they were drawn by politicians fixated on income in the current term without regard for future earnings. In Republican circles, only the Kochs play the long game.
If I correctly understand this, the challenge is a bogus one. They are predicting that the 30 year average will go up. But Heartland's claim is no warming since 1998--a period of only seventeen years. If temperature was rising until then and constant from 1998 on, the thirty year average would continue to go up until 2028, since the early end of the averaging period includes a time when temperature was rising.
Either I misunderstand this, the committee is deliberately making a fraudulent challenge, or the people designing the challenge are mathematically incompetent.
Isn't 100% humidity another way of saying 'pouring rain'?
No actually. It just means the air can't hold anymore water vapor. It means when you sweat, it won't evaporate. The air temp has to drop in order for the air to release the vapor as rain. The quicker and farther it drops, the harder it rains.
Let's see...anti-vaxers are willing to bet their kids' (and other people's) health on pseudoscience. When it comes to ideology, people don't behave rationally.
Isn't it obvious? 97% of climate scientists are willing to risk their reputations to fraudulently present data to sustain their narcissistic need to feed on adulation and fame.
I probably knew that. Once.
Disclosure: I had to look it up.
Nuh uh! The NASA/NOAA models are shown lacking by longitudinal studies. A list of temperature readings from the roof of the Bulgarian Barber College on Breitbart - it's academic AND published. Dumb lie-bruls!
Brainfart is a science source? Who knew?
Hitler's daddy ate grits.
The thing with Congress is that if youve got a Gerrymandered district, your competitors are all as nutty as you are so the Kochs get you at a discount. It costs more to buy someone from a competitive district.
Over the last 20 years, I'd say brain farts have overtaken cattle flatus as a cause of global warming.
I think they were drawn by politicians fixated on income in the current term without regard for future earnings. In Republican circles, only the Kochs play the long game.
Try w2.vatican.va and click Laudato Si
Found it. Thanks!
If I correctly understand this, the challenge is a bogus one. They are predicting that the 30 year average will go up. But Heartland's claim is no warming since 1998--a period of only seventeen years. If temperature was rising until then and constant from 1998 on, the thirty year average would continue to go up until 2028, since the early end of the averaging period includes a time when temperature was rising.
Either I misunderstand this, the committee is deliberately making a fraudulent challenge, or the people designing the challenge are mathematically incompetent.
A climate bet based on one year? What part of "weather isn't climate" don't these clowns get?
Oops, I momentarily fell into climatista name-calling mode, sorry. Please imagine me making that same point in a non-hostile fashion.