Climate Change

[voidisyinyang]

22 hours ago, Jonesboy said:

 

 

The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball (above, right) is expected to instruct his British Columbia attorneys

 

Again, just something to think about.

really?

Quote

 

the judge found that many of the article’s accusations could be read as complaints about the system of science and education—of which Weaver was just a part—rather than specifically alleging flaws in Weaver’s professional character.

But the judge also decided that the derogatory statements aimed more clearly at Weaver failed to meet the legal standard for defamation. His reason? No one could take them seriously. Citing a list of careless inaccuracies in Ball’s article, the judge said it lacked “a sufficient air of credibility to make them believable and therefore potentially defamatory.”

 

oops. https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/02/judge-finds-written-attack-on-climate-scientist-too-ludicrous-to-be-libel/

The Idiot Defense won again!

[windwalker]

10 minutes ago, ralis said:

And, all the tax cuts to the extremely wealthy are going right into the markets!

 

Not all,  considering the percentage of the amount of taxes they pay as a group. The tax cuts will tend to affect those who pay the most over those who don't pay at all or very little.

 

"In 2015, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid $568 billion, or 39.04 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent paid $428 billion, or 29.41 percent of all income taxes.Jan 17, 2018"

Edited February 24, 2019 by windwalker

[windwalker]

8 minutes ago, ralis said:

So he's not some left-wing conspiracy scientist just in it for the money - actually he was on a nuclear sub that had an explosion inside - and they all almost died in the arctic.

 

Link ?

[voidisyinyang]

23 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

 Did you watch the video I posted by the Nobel guy above?

 

The "Nobel guy" - there's a LOT of Nobel guys - I personally have corresponded with Nobel physicist Brian Josephson several times - he practices qigong.

But yeah I'll watch the vid for a good laugh!

OK first let's find out what we're dealing with here:

Quote

“I am not really terribly interested in global warming.  Like most physicists I don't think much about it.  But in 2008 I was in a panel here about global warming and I had to learn something about it.  And I spent a day or so - half a day maybe on Google, and I was horrified by what I learned.”

https://skepticalscience.com/ivar-giaever-nobel-physicist-climate-pseudoscientist.html

So yeah he doesn't know jack about global warming.... but...

He's now against physicists in general:
 

Quote

 

“ in my view, APS has become a political (or religious?) society. Consequently, I resigned from APS …
In this talk I will explain why I became concerned about the climate, and terrified by the one sided propaganda in the media, In particular I am worried about all the money wasted on alternate energies, when so many children in the world go hungry to bed.”

 

 

 

hmm - he was funded by Big Corporate money that is the same source for the PR campaign to deny global warming - the "doubt" doctrine from nicotine causing cancer.

 

Quote

Giaever got a Nobel for superconductors, moved into biophysics, cooperated with Philip Morris for more than a decade, still acts as a Heartland “Expert” and keeps demonstrating ignorance of the climate science he attacks.

https://www.desmogblog.com/2016/01/04/ivar-giaever-nobel-icon-for-climate-deniers

It's called CORPORATE JUNK SCIENCE for a reason!!

 

Quote

"How can you measure the average temperature of the Earth?  I don't think that's possible."

Really - a Nobel physicist said this?

Quote

 

Unfortunately this simply displays an ignorance regarding the surface temperature record, whose accuracy has been confirmed time and time again, and which is also consistent with lower troposphere temperature measurements, as illustrated in Figure 1. 

Glenn Tramblyn has answered Giaever's question in great detail in his four part series Of Averages & Anomalies, and Kevin C also had an excellent and detailed post on recent temperature measurements in The GLOBAL global warming signal.  The answers to these questions are out there for those who are willing to spend more than a few hours on Google searches, and it is not constructive to give presentations on subjects without first doing such basic research.  We are again left wondering why Giaever was asked to give a presentation to Nobel Laureates on a subject on which he has no expertise and has not done even the most basic research.

 

Ah now it makes sense - Giaever - being a Junk Science Tobacco Stooge - is buddies with Fred Singer of the same ilk - exposed in the above documentary I posted "Merchants of Doubt"

 

Quote

 

Chronology of Ivar Giaever's tobacco connections and climate denial

1964-1998 Council for Tobacco Research (CTR) - Distraction Research, Decoy Research, Filibuster Research

Robert Proctor's Golden Holocaust - Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe… covers this in Chapter 16,¹
Such research sounded good, sometimes was very good and even led to Nobels, but studied everything about cancer except connection with tobacco.  Of course, Giaever's Nobel (superconducting) had nothing whatsoever to do with health, but his award was a useful marketing tactic.

1964 Surgeon General report clearly proved smoking-disease links. It was followed by frequent updates, including:

1982  The Health Consequences of Smoking - Cancer: A Report of The Surgeon General

“Giaever” is an easy search at Truth Tobacco Industry Documents and he shows up often in the Philip Morris (PM) collection, with documents spanning at least 1983-2000, 2-4 decades after the 1964 Surgeon General report.

1983.09.16 Giaever, still with General Electric, spent a day with PM scientists and top research executives, such as Cliff Lilly and then-VP R&D Max Hauserman. He spoke for their Technical Seminar Series.

1984.10  PM was building dossiers on researchers, including Giaever, to select speakers for 1985 research symposium.

1984.10.31 PM had proposed speakers and alternates, including Giaever,  p.11.

1985.10.18 PM held its Fifth Science Symposium.  Giaever and his wife were banquet guests, p.13.  PM employees outnumbered others ~3:1, so that the latter were mostly talking to the former.  The image above dates from then.

1992.02 Giaever makes research proposal to PM.

1992 Heidelberg Appeal   Giaever and 71 other Nobelists signed the ambiguous “motherhood” Heidelberg Appeal.²
Fred Singer's SEPP website archived this, as did PM, who certainly cared about it. Singer helped organize many petitions against mainstream climate science, (Crescendo p.93) repeatedly signed by many of the same people, usually not climate scientists, but seeming credible to the general public. Nobelists would have been prized above all, and Singer certainly knew many physicists (Merchants of Doubt), so this mainly shows a Singer-Giaever connection, rather than a clear climate position.

1992.08  Second International Conference on Theories of Carcinogenesis, Oslo, Norway August 15-21. Giaever spoke: 
“Can the modern theory of chaos, fractal mathematics, etc be applied to the problem of carcinogenesis and cancer?”

The  program covered a wide range of topics, but “tobacco” was unmentioned as in their earlier 1986 conference,  This seemed free “distraction” research funded by others, but Francis Roe, a UK tobacco industry consultant was a key organizer and speaker at both.  The CTR and companies monitored these events closely.³

 

 

^{So yeah if you want to eat up the Corporate Junk Science go for it! It's just a big PR scam.}

^{Mass Mind control.}

 

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by voidisyinyang

[rideforever]

53 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

anthropocentric art first become dominant - with rectilinear geometry

 

The purpose of all that is the individuation of universal consciousness into individual beings with unique angles of perceptions (a.k.a souls).

Existence has been experimenting with forms and trying to individuate itself in order to create vastly larger intelligence.
Existence is already nondual, but it is only 1 intelligence, it is universal consciousness.
But the next step it is taking is an attempt to make souls.
Humans are one example of that attempt > most cannot comprehend what is happening nor assist it, and thus perish.
Others do enlighten themselves and become permanent and existence gains a permanent nondual but individuated angle of perception.

[Jonesboy]

36 minutes ago, ralis said:

 

Your narrative is replete with appeals to absolutism. Why? What I read in the above simplistic narrative is a posit of absolutism in order to debunk what you believe is that the scientific method/modeling is based on absolutes. Scientific methodologies are based on probabilities and not absolutes. E.g. probabilities are based on 0-1, 0 defined as impossible and 1 being absolutely certain. 1 has never been defined.

 

No,

 

I have showed repeatedly that the science behind climate change is fake and manipulated.

 

I have posted it for everyone to see. You can choose to ignore it if you want but it is bad form to attack others who choose not to.

[ralis]

21 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

No,

 

I have showed repeatedly that the science behind climate change is fake and manipulated.

 

I have posted it for everyone to see. You can choose to ignore it if you want but it is bad form to attack others who choose not to.

 

You derived your opinion from bogus sources with no analysis of your own except personal opinion. Again your narrative is an appeal to absolute thinking. Furthermore, you are attacking valid research/researchers of which you know nothing about, except what appeals to confirming your bias.

Edited February 24, 2019 by ralis

[Jonesboy]

50 minutes ago, ralis said:

 

You derived your opinion from bogus sources with no analysis of your own except personal opinion. Again your narrative is an appeal to absolute thinking. Furthermore, you are attacking valid research/researchers of which you know nothing about, except what appeals to confirming your bias.

 

Actually, isn’t the absolute thinking being that climate change is real and any differing view is wrong or one must be working for some nefarious industry?

 

I have mentioned one scientist who was found in court to be a liar. I have showed many examples of manipulated data.

 

I have shown Nobel prized researchers expressing the same questions as I have presented in the thread.

 

As always the end result of a losing argument is to attack the person . Based on your own argument where have you presented anything other than personal attacks? You haven’t.

[flowing hands]

57 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

I’m sorry but your way alone does not make it the Dao way. 

 

What you you are doing is saying my view is correct, any differing opinions is incorrect and anti Dao. So, do what I do, live like I do or you are wrong morally and spiritually.

 

Intersting view to say the least.

 

I would also agree that the lastest climate report was very manipulated as I pointed out earlier.

 

I don’t see how you can blame Trump for current U.S. co2 levels but if it makes you happy to do so go ahead.

Very mixed grammar here for someone who corrected mine! Who are you talking about me or you?  Dao and way are the same thing.

Trump did not want to go to the last climate change meeting because his scientist and his heavy polluting industries would mean they would have to do something to change what they were doing. They didn't want to because it doesn't make the $'s. So they will gamble the $'s while they are busy polluting the world on scientist's reports who are biased and have a political agenda.

 

You have hijacked my thread, made it into a 'lets keep making lots of money and continue to pollute the world anti climate change argument, when I simply asked people about what they were doing to help other diminishing life and climate change, which for selfish ends you have blatantly denied and ignored, because you think that evidence from such people who are in the field looking at biodiversity can see what is happening, are lying!!!

 

It would have been more appropriate to have started a thread of your own about how you think we are not extinguishing other life forms and there's no such thing as climate change.

 

Who would I believe, a Trump admin. or scientists who have no political agenda. It is really an easy choice for me, because  true spiritual followers of the Dao 'Love the world as their own selves'. I personally don't want to chance my luck on the worlds healthiness on the Trump admin. Some of course love the $ more and will continue with their lives doing nothing to diminish the effect on other life.

 

 

[Jonesboy]

1 minute ago, flowing hands said:

Very mixed grammar here for someone who corrected mine! Who are you talking about me or you?  Dao and way are the same thing.

Trump did not want to go to the last climate change meeting because his scientist and his heavy polluting industries would mean they would have to do something to change what they were doing. They didn't want to because it doesn't make the $'s. So they will gamble the $'s while they are busy polluting the world on scientist's reports who are biased and have a political agenda.

 

You have hijacked my thread, made it into a 'lets keep making lots of money and continue to pollute the world anti climate change argument, when I simply asked people about what they were doing to help other diminishing life and climate change, which for selfish ends you have blatantly denied and ignored, because you think that evidence from such people who are in the field looking at biodiversity can see what is happening, are lying!!!

 

It would have been more appropriate to have started a thread of your own about how you think we are not extinguishing other life forms and there's no such thing as climate change.

 

Who would I believe, a Trump admin. or scientists who have no political agenda. It is really an easy choice for me, because  true spiritual followers of the Dao 'Love the world as their own selves'. I personally don't want to chance my luck on the worlds healthiness on the Trump admin. Some of course love the $ more and will continue with their lives doing nothing to diminish the effect on other life.

 

 

 

I never correct anyone’s grammar because I know mine sucks 😀 So I am not sure where that is coming from.

 

If you only wanted a thread where people agree with you then you should of put that in the OP.

 

Beyond your accusations about the Trump administration do you have any publications from the administration against climate change? The last government report was for it... just saying.

 

Trump was against the Paris accord because it was asking America to pay 300 billion a year to other countries. Just crazy.

 

Did you read the report on Germany how they have spent 580 billion on alternative energy and co2 has increased? The same results as California btw.

 

The Dao is about realizing you and the world are one and the same. Not telling others how they should heat their homes, what type of vehicles they should drive or that we should give the government the power to regulate the rain water that falls in our yards.

[flowing hands]

4 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

I never correct anyone’s grammar because I know mine sucks 😀 So I am not sure where that is coming from.

 

If you only wanted a thread where people agree with you then you should of put that in the OP.

 

Beyond your accusations about the Trump administration do you have any publications from the administration against climate change? The last government report was for it... just saying.

 

Trump was against the Paris accord because it was asking America to pay 300 billion a year to other countries. Just crazy.

 

Did you read the report on Germany how they have spent 580 billion on alternative energy and co2 has increased? The same results as California btw.

 

The Dao is about realizing you and the world are one and the same. Not telling others how they should heat their homes, what type of vehicles they should drive or that we should give the government the power to regulate the rain water that falls in our yards.

Now you really are nit picking and letting yourself off your own responsibility. Did I say in my thread that I wanted to discuss the ins and outs of climate change and whether one believes its real? Short answer NO! 

 

Your statement about Germany actually doesn't tell the truth, a case of manipulation which you've clearly stated you don't like. In the production of electricity Co2 went down. It was due to transport that co2 levels rose not the use of clean energy. Without the use of clean energy Germany's co2 would be far greater. See how you manipulated the truth to try and falsify statistics!

 

 

[Jonesboy]

17 minutes ago, flowing hands said:

Now you really are nit picking and letting yourself off your own responsibility. Did I say in my thread that I wanted to discuss the ins and outs of climate change and whether one believes its real? Short answer NO! 

 

Your statement about Germany actually doesn't tell the truth, a case of manipulation which you've clearly stated you don't like. In the production of electricity Co2 went down. It was due to transport that co2 levels rose not the use of clean energy. Without the use of clean energy Germany's co2 would be far greater. See how you manipulated the truth to try and falsify statistics!

 

 

 

I didn’t manipulate anything.

 

Quote

 

Germany’s carbon emissions are not declining much, despite renewables increasing to almost 30% of the country’s power mix this year (see figure below), and over 50% of its installed capacity. Unfortunately, coal has also increased to about 30% and, along with power purchases from France and other countries in Europe, is used to load-follow, or buffer, the intermittency of the renewables.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Germany’s carbon emissions per person actually rose slightly in 2013 and 2015. The country produces much more electricity than it needs and is not addressing oil in the transportation sector.

As Peter Rez at Arizona State University discusses, renewables will not make much of a dent in their total carbon emissions. The problem is that even when renewables produce enough energy to supply all of the country’s electricity, the variability of the renewables means Germany has to keep the coal plants running, over half of which use the dirtiest of all coal, lignite.

 

 

 

In fact, in 2016, 7 out of 10 of Europe’s biggest polluters were German lignite power plants.

 

Since Germany is phasing out its zero-emission nuclear plants in several years, the situation will only get worse. The loss of that nuclear will wipe out the total gains made in wind power (see figure), the main reason that the leading climate scientists in the worldwarn that nuclear needs to be sustained, and even increased.[/b]

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/10/10/why-arent-renewables-decreasing-germanys-carbon-emissions/#519e1b7e68e1
 

 

Now, if you want to know how that change has impacted normal people. I will give you a hint, it hurts the poor the most.

 

How Electricity Became a Luxury Good

Germany's agressive and reckless expansion of wind and solar power has come with a hefty pricetag for consumers, and the costs often fall disproportionately on the poor. Government advisors are calling for a completely new start.

 

http://m.spiegel.de/international/germany/high-costs-and-errors-of-german-transition-to-renewable-energy-a-920288.html

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by Jonesboy

[ralis]

54 minutes ago, flowing hands said:

Very mixed grammar here for someone who corrected mine! Who are you talking about me or you?  Dao and way are the same thing.

Trump did not want to go to the last climate change meeting because his scientist and his heavy polluting industries would mean they would have to do something to change what they were doing. They didn't want to because it doesn't make the $'s. So they will gamble the $'s while they are busy polluting the world on scientist's reports who are biased and have a political agenda.

 

You have hijacked my thread, made it into a 'lets keep making lots of money and continue to pollute the world anti climate change argument, when I simply asked people about what they were doing to help other diminishing life and climate change, which for selfish ends you have blatantly denied and ignored, because you think that evidence from such people who are in the field looking at biodiversity can see what is happening, are lying!!!

 

It would have been more appropriate to have started a thread of your own about how you think we are not extinguishing other life forms and there's no such thing as climate change.

 

Who would I believe, a Trump admin. or scientists who have no political agenda. It is really an easy choice for me, because  true spiritual followers of the Dao 'Love the world as their own selves'. I personally don't want to chance my luck on the worlds healthiness on the Trump admin. Some of course love the $ more and will continue with their lives doing nothing to diminish the effect on other life.

 

 

 

Here is Trump's agenda to gaslight the gullible that human activity is irrelevant to AGW.

 

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/431330-white-house-committee-to-reassess-climate-science-conclusions

[windwalker]

7 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

Germany's agressive and reckless expansion of wind and solar power has come with a hefty pricetag for consumers, and the costs often fall disproportionately on the poor. Government advisors are calling for a completely new start.

 

 

Of course what would one expect from those asking others to do that will never affect them.  It does allow them to be in control with the usual results of government controled mandated systems.

[ralis]

8 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

 

Of course what would one expect from those asking others to do that will never affect them.  It does allow them to be in control with the usual results of government controled mandated systems.

 

Hypocrisy to the max from one who served in the military for 20 plus years and was under government control for the entire time. 

[Jonesboy]

21 minutes ago, ralis said:

 

Here is Trump's agenda to gaslight the gullible that human activity is irrelevant to AGW.

 

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/431330-white-house-committee-to-reassess-climate-science-conclusions

 

So, reviewing the science is now a bad thing?

 

Such a horrible person he must be!!!

 

He should just believe what he is told to believe like everyone else!!

[voidisyinyang]

3 hours ago, rideforever said:

 

The purpose of all that is the individuation of universal consciousness into individual beings with unique angles of perceptions (a.k.a souls).

That's Western racism - I critiqued Ken Wilber who made the same claim - in my master's thesis in 2000. So just scroll back in the thread to watch the interviews with the original human culture healers. Notice that there is a different individual being for each interview - from a culture from 100,000 years ago. It's not due to Westernization.

[voidisyinyang]

1 hour ago, Jonesboy said:

 

So, reviewing the science is now a bad thing?

 

Such a horrible person he must be!!!

 

He should just believe what he is told to believe like everyone else!!

Do you have any peer-reviewed studies you want us to review? I've posted quite a few links already to peer-reviewed studies.

Go ahead and post some. Then I'll review them.

[voidisyinyang]

2 hours ago, Jonesboy said:

 

 Nobel prized

.

Sorry - when I search that term I get no hits at all on the interwebs.

But then again - congratulation on being the FIRST to turn the "Nobel Prize" into a past tense verb.

[voidisyinyang]

4 hours ago, windwalker said:

 

Link ?

I already posted a link of a video interview with him.

Is this really a 2 year old game of - "If I don't google it then it doesn't exist?"

Wow the interwebs really hasn't changed has it?

20 years of "If I cover my eyes then it doesn't exist!!"

 

Near death on a nuclear sub didn't stop my work on Arctic ice | New ...

 

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23130910-500-near-death-on-a-nuclear-sub-...

Sep 14, 2016 - The Arctic has given ocean physicist Peter Wadhams moments of heart-stopping danger and magnificent beauty. Now he is watching it ...

 

[Jonesboy]

21 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

Sorry - when I search that term I get no hits at all on the interwebs.

But then again - congratulation on being the FIRST to turn the "Nobel Prize" into a past tense verb.

 

Well thank you, I always like being the first at something. 😀

 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by Jonesboy

[ralis]

35 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

Sorry - when I search that term I get no hits at all on the interwebs.

But then again - congratulation on being the FIRST to turn the "Nobel Prize" into a past tense verb.

 

I googled the Nobel Prize winner Ivar Giaever and he is tied in with the Mercer's as well as the Heartland Institute. Right wing anti-science funding machines, lest we forget, anti-intellectual.

 

https://www.desmogblog.com/ivar-giaever

Edited February 24, 2019 by ralis

[voidisyinyang]

1 minute ago, ralis said:

 

I googled the Nobel Prize winner Ivar Giaever and he is tied in with the Mercer's as well as the Heartland Institute. Right wing anti-science funding machines, lest we forget, anti-intellectual.

 

https://www.desmogblog.com/ivar-giaever

yeah he's a corporate junk science goon.

And just becuz someone got a Nobel prize in a specialized area doesn't mean they know much about other subjects.

When I corresponded with Nobel Physicist Brian Josephson - first thing he said to me was, "I can't comment on your research since I don't know much music theory." But we kept corresponding - and later on he tried to claim that I did not understand music theory. haha. He was wrong but why shouldn't he be wrong? He had asked me what I thought of his music compositions - and he had thanked me for sending him a quote from another physicist - actually two other physicists. One of them he cited in one of his lectures. So we corresponded off and on for several years. But that does not mean he understood music theory - at least not what I was talking about.

[voidisyinyang]

19 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

Well thank you, I always like being the first at something. 😀

 

 

 

 

yeah you already posted his vid.

Since he's a physicist does he talk about this?

physics today article to the page on

 

"collisional broadening" due to quantum frequency absorbent coefficient increasing from increased CO2. https://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/papers/PhysTodayRT2011.pdf

Or is your Corporate Junk science goon just taking smack about global warming? haha.

So when you gonna post some peer-reviewed science so we can comment on it?

I'll post some for you.  So Raymond Pierrehumbert - he was at University of Chicago and now he's at Oxford. He's a physics professor but he specializes in global warming.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299353462_How_to_decarbonize_Look_to_Sweden

Quote

Bringing global warming to a halt requires that worldwide net emissions of carbon dioxide be brought to essentially zero; the sooner this occurs, the less warming our descendants for the next 1000 years and more will need to adapt to. The widespread fear that the actions needed to bring this about conflict with economic growth is a major impediment to efforts to protect the climate. But much of this fear is pointless, and the magnitude of the task – while great – is no greater than the challenges that human ingenuity has surmounted in the past. To light the way forward, we need to examine success stories where nations have greatly reduced their carbon dioxide emissions while simultaneously maintaining vigorous growth in their standard of living; a prime example is Sweden. Through a combination of sensible government infrastructure policies and free-market incentives, Sweden has managed to successfully decarbonize, cutting its per capita emissions by a factor of 3 since the 1970s, while doubling its per capita income and providing a wide range of social benefits. This has all been accomplished within a vigorous capitalistic framework that in many ways better embodies free-market principles than the US economy. Consequently, the Swedish experience shows that solving global warming does not require us to “tear down capitalism.” The world just needs to be a bit more like Sweden.

 

Notice he is not "debating" whether human-induced global warming is real or not.

Quote

The long-term warming from an anthropogenic increase in atmospheric CO2 is often assumed to be proportional to the forcing associated with that increase. This paper examines this linear approximation using a zero-dimensional energy balance model with a temperature-dependent feedback, with parameter values drawn from physical arguments and general circulation models. For a positive feedback temperature dependence, warming increases Earth's sensitivity, while greater sensitivity makes Earth warm more. These effects can feed on each other, greatly amplifying warming. As a result, for reasonable values of feedback temperature dependence and preindustrial feedback, Earth can jump to a warmer state under only one or two CO2 doublings. The linear approximation breaks down in the long tail of high climate sensitivity commonly seen in observational studies. Understanding feedback temperature dependence is therefore essential for inferring the risk of high warming from modern observations. Studies that assume linearity likely underestimate the risk of high warming.

On the contrary to "debating" whether anthropogenic global warming is real - he is arguing instead that global warming is now ABRUPT

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277978548_Feedback_temperature_dependence_determines_the_risk_of_high_warming_FEEDBACK_TEMPERATURE_DEPENDENCE

 

[windwalker]

53 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

Is this really a 2 year old game of - "If I don't google it then it doesn't exist?"

Wow the interwebs really hasn't changed has it?

20 years of "If I cover my eyes then it doesn't exist!!"

 

I guess not, but good try.

Which  Royal Navy submarine had an accident under the ice.

Edited February 24, 2019 by windwalker