climate and vaccine deniers are the same, page-99

morning,

now, cyclones

first we were told we would have more and more powerful cyclones.

then we changed to we will have more powerful cyclones, but they might not be as frequent.

Now, we will have more intense ones but less frequent.

And now ---------- this

http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/5275/20131211/decade-arctic-saw-40-percent-more-cyclones-previously-believed.htm


Well, bugger me ----

all of a sudden we find out that the planet has more cyclones than we thought?????????

arrh huh ------- you mean we didn't actually know what was going on?

That's correct -- we know so little we undercounted cyclones in the Artic -------- the northern hemisphere where the bulk of the world's population lives ---------- we miscounted by 40% ----------- 40%.

We also don't have a clue how much sunlight falls on the oceans in all but a few locations and even that data is not considered accurate.

You know oceans - that is the big watery place where phytoplankton lives -- that's the stuff that absorbs about half of the CO2 in the air --------- it needs sunlight to do it of course.


Now, how in the name of god can you put together models that you try and convince the world are accurate predictors when you don't even know the slightest thing about very basic stuff.


Then you say that sceptical people are not accepting your peer reviewed science --- good science.

Bollocks.

have a great day all

Pinto