Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
- 54Upvotes of all answers in this question
Someone named "Michael" has confessed for many of the misdeeds that I believed were done by Clown Crusher--creating hundreds of fake accounts, flooding this group with questions, writing obscene poetry about me, etc.--and says that we shouldn't blame Clown Crusher for that. While I find the confession rather dubious, I will apologize to Clown Crusher for believing that he did that.
I won't apologize for complaining about the lies he has told about me, about the lies he told about science and for him blocking people.
Since the confession has been deleted twice already, here is a screen shot of it:12 Answers14 hours ago
- 10Upvotes of all answers in this question
I went on Google Scholar and tried to find some, but the only thing that even looked like a journal publication was something about dogs. Maybe she should tell us about whether the dog population is increasing or decreasing.6 Answers2 days ago
- 30Upvotes of all answers in this questionFavorite Answer:
Corona virus. But there is some words. Corona virus may be uprooted within 3-5 years but the effect of climate change is increasing day by day.8 Answers1 day ago
- 81Upvotes of all answers in this question
It's been claimed that this meme is a scholarly source & has been peer-reviewed. Who exactly reviewed this authoritative research meme?Favorite Answer:
That would be "no one."
The link listed in the meme is to a personal blog, not a professional journal.
A blog which is the only place any of the material is published.
Because it can't pass peer review.
@JOHN - Yes, essentially every time the clown posts it, he claims it's "peer-reviewed."
@Let's Head Out - Though the screen shot in the question says "seven months ago," it gets posted frequently. Some times multiple times a day.
@Nottingham - No, she is not a "polar bear specialist." She claims to be a polar bear enthusiast. But she has no academic credentials denoting expertise in them, nor has she ever done any independent research on them herself.
Leafing through the published papers of others who have actually done so, then claiming those papers say something the authors themselves deny, is neither "scholarly" nor "authoritative."
@anonymous - Her dissertation was titled "Animal Domestication and Vertebrate Speciation: A Paradigm for the Origin of Species".
It had nothing to do with "Polar bear thyroid and digestion."
The paper she wrote on that topic was something she wrote in grad school and wasn't remotely a "dissertation."11 Answers2 days ago
- 16Upvotes of all answers in this question
As in "climate denial"8 Answers1 day ago
- 7Upvotes of all answers in this questionFavorite Answer:
It sucks. I can only pray for things to get better, and hope Trump wins in 2024.
I also think Democrats are a total disgrace to America5 Answers4 days ago
- 40Upvotes of all answers in this question
Earlier today, he deleted one of his questions because it was based on him badly misreading a graph from a UN report. After he deleted that, he created another question based on the UN report and THAT question relied on ignoring half the data from the report. He also claimed Susan Crockford had peer reviewed research showing the polar bear number was increasing, but he couldn't find anything to support that. For the great majority of his questions he blocks science-literate users from answering--is that what he relies on? Why can't or won't any of the anthropogenic climate change deniers (JimZ, Daro, Solar Wind, etc.) recognize and point out his mistakes? Is this what they think "peer review" is, letting a fellow denier off the hook when they make glaring errors?6 Answers1 day ago
- 121Upvotes of all answers in this question
The warming follows the logarithm of CO2 concentration, as expected, and the natural variability can be rejected as the cause of the warming at greater than a 99% level of significance.14 Answers4 days ago
- 27Upvotes of all answers in this question8 Answers3 days ago
- 119Upvotes of all answers in this question
The undeniable fact is that “carbon dioxide” is NOT a “pollutant” but an absolutely vital trace gas in the Earth’s atmosphere, currently at around 0.004% of all its components. Nitrogen and Oxygen make up 99%, with the so-called greenhouse gases making up the remaining 1% of which CO2 is 0.04%.
Every climate model predictions have been WRONG. The alarmist climate science has not made it through the scientific method and is thus pseudoscience, backed by government consensus.
CO2 does not trap heat then recycle it to the surface, with repeated cycles called the “back radiation” loop, the key component of the anthropogenic global warming theory or as I call it hunch. This violates the 1st and 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, the 1st law deals with the conservation of energy, with the back radiation loop being identified as a “perpetual motion engine” which violates this 1st law. The 2nd law deals with “heat only transfers from a warm object a cool object”. At the top of the atmosphere it is about -50 degrees C, with hardly any air pressure, there is no energy source to enable this rarified atmosphere to rotate down and reheat the surface of the Earth, this procedure violates both the 1st and 2nd law of T, plus a cool object cannot warm a warm object. Does an ice cube heat up your cup of coffee?23 Answers7 days ago
- 2Upvotes of all answers in this question7 Answers4 days ago
- 10Upvotes of all answers in this question
All the stats I found show fishing's been up for decades ------->4 Answers1 day ago
- 54Upvotes of all answers in this question
Doesn’t this real world observation totally dismantle the AGW hypothesis and put it into the hall of shame?
How can this be happening under the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis at this time of the year? Average world temperatures according to UAH is at -0.01 and even NASA has admitted that the Earth is headed towards cooling. The alarmist hockey stick graph temps have moved sideways for twenty years now.12 Answers6 days ago
- 71Upvotes of all answers in this question
Do you think what drove The Yahoo Joker/Clown Crusher the most crazy about me was that I played by the rules and he didn't?
He had dozens of accounts, I didn't. He blocked people from answering his questions, I never did. He hid his personal information, but I always shared mine. I gave science-based answers and he never did. I think it really drove him crazy that I didn't cheat the way he did.8 Answers4 days ago
- 4Upvotes of all answers in this question
You can see from the chart that the correlation goes the other way.4 Answers1 day ago
- 18Upvotes of all answers in this questionFavorite Answer:
There is no credible, unmanipulated evidence that suggests such a thing.5 Answers3 days ago
- 45Upvotes of all answers in this questionFavorite Answer:
I won't miss the pathological lies of Dirac and Georgie. Even now, Dirac is lying. But he got what he deserved and I loved seeing that.22 Answers1 week ago
- 26Upvotes of all answers in this question
Do some people think global warming is a hoax because they believe every word America's former president said is gospel truth?Favorite Answer:
No, I don't think they disbelieve AGW because of Trump, I think that is one of the reason they are Trump supporters.
Modern conservatism is delusional conservatism, because it is based on believing conspiracies and rejecting objective evidence. That made Trump the ideal candidate for the delusional conservatives--they reject global warming even though there is massive evidence the planet is warming, they believe in election fraud even though there is no evidence for it. They believe cutting taxes will increase revenue and balance the budget even though there is 50 years of evidence that shows the opposite is true.
I give Christian Sinner credit for finding a NASA link that at least casts a little doubt on the water vapor feedback, but I wonder how old that link is? There is increasing evidence that water vapor in the atmosphere is increasing with temperature, as the relative humidity stays approximately constant. Also, I question who ever wrote the original link, because the connection between temperature and water vapor content of the atmosphere is obvious to even casual observers. We all notice the atmosphere being dry during the winter and humid during the summer, so that's pretty strong evidence.
I don't give him credit for the cartoon he includes with his answer, which is insulting and obnoxious. I don't know what Christian Sinner does, but if he has such a low opinion of the ethics of scientists, then my guess is that he's not an ethical person himself.8 Answers5 days ago
- 27Upvotes of all answers in this question
Which requires more knowledge of science, freely discussing science, or calling everyone that discusses it a sock puppet or a paid alarmist?
By "freely discussing science", that does not mean posting a bunch of papers where you misconstrue what they say and block everyone that would point that out.4 Answers2 days ago
- 95Upvotes of all answers in this question
I think about it all the time. Global warming. Will we actually get it under control? Is it actually real? Will the world start dieing off someday in my life? What will happen when the earth heats up too much? We are gonna see problems like we never would have imagined. Billions of people will probably starve and people will be going crazy to survive. The ecosystem is already getting so messed up and you know I don't even have to go on about it23 Answers1 week ago