Max,

Still trying to salvage some self-respect by pushing that semantic nonsense about reserves v. resources, a debate you had with yourself alone and convinced yourself you won out against yourself.

Meanwhile a little reminder of the carbon budget moronosity you once engaged in... http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18793#335172

And just because I enjoy it so much, the RCP debacle.... http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8989#295403

from that post.." I'm sorry Max, but it shows that you really haven't got the faintest idea what you're talking about."

After these two debacles, Max, wisely, took a year's sabbatical from OLO.

_______________________________________________________________-

SR,

"Ah a Lex Fridman fan I see. So am I."

Nup.... a Jordan Peterson fan. Who is interviewing him is rather immaterial.

"As to your non answer regarding increasing global temperature you lot have again latched on to a peak in the record like you did with 1998. This time you are doing it with 2015 to try to claim global temperatures are decreasing over the last 7 years."

Oh dear, SR, you never did understand those issues about trends did you? D'ya me to dig up the hilarious post you put up about the so-called pause?

Oh, and you wont be able to find anywhere where I used 1998 as the start of a declining trend analysis.

Oh, and I wasn't using 2015 as the start here. I said 7 to 8 years. I was using June 2014 as the start.

Oh, and I didn't "latched on to a peak in the record". 2015 wasn't a peak year, that was 2016. Do try to keep up.

Struth, SR, how many errors can you make in one post? But as we all know, as soon as numbers are involved, SR starts to struggle.

About what I'd expect. I said "Here we have people who preen themselves that they follow the science when in fact that have very little understanding of the actual science and effectively no understanding of the societal implications of their ignorance."

They are trained to follow the politics and part of that training is to regurgitate the follow-the-science mantra.

But when faced with using the science to gain the point they hurry to use the ad hominem (Max) or utterly tortured figures (SR).

As I said, the science is no longer important. The warmists and their flying-monkeys no longer care that the science doesn't prove their case and intend to steamroller they political agenda through irrespective.

But we are already seeing the strains that this false science is causing to society and the inevitable push back. Germany reverting to fossil fuels to keep warm. They say its temporary but we'll see. Italy returning to nuclear. The beginnings of sanity around Ev's. China offers to buy more coal from us and the government cheers.

When people are warm and well-fed they will tolerate the green fantasies. But lack of heating/power, rising inflation and scare calories and sacrificing to Gaia becomes less attractive.

Oh Mhaze - why are your powers of comprehension so poor?
You obviously still think you scored some point or other in this post - and it's just so pathetic it's sad! Yours is a child's taunt, a semantic game - nothing more. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18793#335172

At the time the world's politicians were saying we had 565 gigatons to 2 degrees. So I was quoting that, referencing the urgency that even the politicians were quoting. But at the time I didn't think we should hit 2 degrees - and guess what? Later the politicians finally admitted the climate science and shifted to 1.5.

I was trying to explain this to you when you just cut in with...
"He believed it before he didn't. He believed it yesterday and he'll believe it tomorrow but today, since he's asked to justify it, he doesn't believe it. Even I'm embarrassed for him."

Gosh! Well, I hang my head in shame. But - then the world moved to 1.5 degrees, confirming what I was saying at the time. Your petty little semantic game is just so much old man self-congratulatory armchair slapping – but utterly disconnected from reality.

Oh, and the next link? Not even semantics – just downright weird assertions plucked out of thin air. It’s not my fault you’re like this. I just hope you wake up to yourself one day, and shudder at how utterly dense your posts here are. But in case you’re still having trouble comprehending this: I’ll repeat what I wrote back then.

In summary, global warming is real, is us and is serious. Deny any of these and you have become EXACTLY the kind of irrational tinfoil hat, alternate reality conspiracy theorist I thought you were.

The main reason I left OLO? It's boring. Pointing out how utterly childish and fallacious and retarded Denier arguments are is a waste of time. But sometimes sheer morbid curiosity brings me back. Are they still so overwhelmed by their Dunning-Kruger's syndrome that they cannot see reality? The answer it seems is yes.

Tell yourself what you need in order to salvage what you consider self-respect. But the fact is that you spent close on 20 posts pushing the claims about a mathematically proven CO2 budget.

Rather than saying it was a political calculations you were touting it as a scientific fact and were deriding anyone who doubted it.

Until.....

I demonstrated that not only was the number invalid but that it had no mathematical support and wasn't even based on any science. Instead it was a propaganda piece that you'd fallen for - much like your 4 Hiroshima rubbish.

Anyone who cared could go back and read the thread which contained the post I linked earlier and see the truth of the matter. Its revealing that you're prepared to simply concoct an alternate story to try to hide your embarrassment.

"But the fact is that you spent close on 20 posts pushing the claims about a mathematically proven CO2 budget."
Oh seriously Mhaze - this is just so DENSE of you!
Yes I did! I said that! Now, what you have failed to understand is what that MEANS that I said that. This is where your comprehension fails you - where you truly have some kind of learning difficulty. It actually makes me sorry for you!
That was the legitimate SCIENCE. An extra 565 gt from that date would cause 2 degrees.
I never said that wasn't TRUE - that I didn't believe that SCIENTIFIC MODEL of what carbon would do to us! Did I? Please - show me where I said I disbelieved the science?
"I demonstrated that not only was the number invalid"
Well there's some self-congratulatory bullcrap and you demonstrated no such thing.

"but that it had no mathematical support and wasn't even based on any science." Crap. The physics of CO2's radiative forcing equation is demonstrable, and NASA's clever models running the earth climate system repeated under many variations demonstrated that would be the outcome. Is I still accept that science.

I'm not taking science lessons from some old dude on the internet that can't tell the difference between an oil resource and a reserve!

I just said I didn't accept that it was a good idea to get to 2 degrees! And low and behold, the pollies eventually decided at later climate talks that 1.5 should be the new maximum.

Yeah, look, you're right Mhaze. All the world's physicists in every physics lab were bought out by THEM. THEY also broke every Fourier Device and massaged the readings, just in case a physics student should happen along.

THEY made the bugs hatch before the birds hatched, altering vital seasonal responses in various ecosystems. THEY melted the glaciers and ice caps with huge space-lasers. THEY warmed our nights - consistent with the atmosphere trapping more heat - but did so with giant earth-changing space-radiators. THEY wet the atmosphere with giant invisible sprinklers to make our atmosphere wetter (consistent with global warming physics.)

THEY raised the sea levels, THEY changed the seasons, THEY increased wildfires in some areas and deluges in others, and THEY added 4 Hiroshima bombs of energy per second.

THEY created the greatest global conspiracy in the history of the human race - and only brave little Mhaze and his buddies on OLO can spot what's happening!

Ha ha ha ha