Scientific Fraud

[bcollins]

Dr. Pachauri said it doesn't disprove anthropogenic global warming but surface temperature remained level. He said it would have to continue for 30 years. Could you imagine just for 1 second what it would be like if the head of the IPCC said "There is ABSOLUTELY NO anthropogenic global warming"? Just imagine it....funding pulled, lawsuits, jobs destroyed (only this time in the science sector).... think scientists would allow that? Think the people involved in carbon offsets would take that lying down?

I'm pragmatic, so when IPCC's Kevin Trenberth says that he can't account for surface temperature remaining the same despite an increase in CO2 emissions for circa 17 years and then laments it as a "travesty" (his word) I don't believe it matters if he meant "Scientifically its a shame we can't account for where the extra energy/ heat is going" or "it's a shame there's no connection between CO2 emissions and warming" the take away is THE SURFACE TEMPERATURE DID NOT RISE for reasons anthropogenic or not....but whatever you are 100000000% right I'll wait for global warming apocalypse as predicted by your buddy Al Gore....we have 1 and 1/2 years to go.

Again dancing like a grease drop on a hot skillet. The claim is straightforward, the data already compiled - all that remains is your evidence to support your claim.

You are doing an awful lot of squirming around to avoid backing up your statement.

Claim: There has been 0 warming since 1998.

Argument in support of claim:

I guess 2 IPCC chairmen admitting to 0 warming for 15-17 years is tumbleweed to you.... not my problem you tell me "Believe in global warming" and IPCC scientists guys on your side say "No warming in 15-17 years" ....don't get angry at me, your boys said it.

But I guess I need to shoot up a satellite and get my own data so I'll get back with you once I do that....think it'll be "warming" or "cooling" y'all are worried about by that time?



Reverse the effects See this is where the little issue of 96% of the CO2 released into the atmosphere is NOT man made comes into play...but I digress, obviously you guys are saving the world 1 CO2 molecule at a time

Can you be any more obtuse? Posting a quote from a dubious website that may or may not be true is in no way, shape, or form evidence that supports your claim. I'm not asking you to play keyboard warrior and find some article posted on some website that claims that one of these guys said something - any idiot can post something on the web. This is not evidence that holds for the challenge I've given you. Nor am I asking you to launch your own satellite. I'm asking you to use data already gathered and compiled - the exact same data used by both those who support and deny your claim - and show me a logical argument that supports your claim.

This is a very specific request. You have only danced around it and dodged addressing my very specific request. Show me your evidence that supports your claim. You stated it as if it were true, so now I ask you to argue why this is the case using not opinion, not second or third hand opinion, but good old solid data. Since you want to make a scientific claim, you have to support it using the scientific method.

There is no gray area here. Stop waffling and fidgeting. You made a very strong claim and I want you to make a very simple argument using well respected data to back it up. Simple as.