Originally posted by CorvallisBMW
View Post
-
entirely possibleThe American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. -Alexis de TocquevilleOriginally posted by Fusion
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt- -
you may not like the source, and frankly i don't care, but the data is what feeds the IPCC and others
selected quotes
RSS
The slope is flat since January 1997 or 16 years and 1 month. (goes to January) RSS is 193/204 or 94.6% of the way to Ben Santer’s 17 years.
For RSS the warming is not significant for over 23 years.
UAH
The slope is flat since July 2008 or 4 years, 7 months. (goes to January)
For UAH, the warming is not significant for over 19 years.
Hadcrut4
The slope is flat since November 2000 or 12 years, 3 months. (goes to January.)
For Hadcrut4, the warming is not significant for over 18 years.
Hadcrut3
The slope is flat since March 1997 or 15 years, 11 months (goes to January)
For Hadcrut3, the warming is not significant for over 19 years.
Hadsst2
The slope is flat since March 1997 or 15 years, 11 months. (goes to January)
GISS
The slope is flat since May 2001 or 11 years, 9 months. (goes to January)
For GISS, the warming is not significant for over 17 years.
Conclusion
Above, various facts have been presented along with sources from where all facts were obtained. Keep in mind that no one is entitled to their facts. It is only in the interpretation of the facts for which legitimate discussions can take place. After looking at the above facts, do you feel that we should spend billions to prevent catastrophic warming?
The new data confirms the existence of a pause in global warming,’ Professor Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Science at America’s Georgia Tech university, told me yesterday.
Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did.
The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event – the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather – ‘it could go on for a while’.
haha at least cale admits to being a denier“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston ChurchillComment
-
giggles
Climate change researcher James Hansen, the long-time head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, is retiring from government employment to campaign for policies that he believes must be adopted to avoid impending catastrophic global warming.
...
More recently, Hansen has admitted that increases in global average temperatures have been halted for the last sixteen years. He argues that the rise must resume, but we shall see. In the meantime, other climate researchers are suggesting that the sensitivity of the climate to loading up the atmosphere with more carbon dioxide is somewhat less than many climate models have assumed.Comment
-
gwb again with his repetition of the dumb claim that global warming has stopped because of an outlier used as the starting point. Regardless of how many times we say why it's a broken argument, he forgets and simply reposts it again.
Originally posted by rwh11385 View Post
And neither gwb nor fusion seem to want to answer this:
Unless there's some scientific explanation for the "disappearance" of energy or heat (aka impossible destruction of energy) that is the result of sunlight traveling through an atmosphere with additional GHG, then all of the 'argument' against climate change is just pure and simple denialism. The weatherman turned denier blogger hasn't had anything about why that I've seen which uses science to show that global warming / climate change isn't a realistic understanding of natural phenomenon. Until there's actually an intelligent and science-based reasoning for why GHGs don't affect our planet, it will be the science-literate versus denier trolls.Originally posted by rwh11385 View PostLast edited by rwh11385; 04-04-2013, 09:09 PM.Comment
-
-
So GWB, me and a NASA scientist are wrong?Comment
-
You mean this one?Originally posted by Fusion View Post
Yeah. Try actually reading what he says as opposed to what other people summarize simply.Comment
-
Y hello thar straw man.Originally posted by MF DOOM View PostNeed parts now? Need them cheap? steve@blunttech.com
Chief Sales Officer, Midwest Division—Blunt Tech Industries
www.gutenparts.com
One stop shopping for NEW, USED and EURO PARTS!
Comment
-
non sequitur actuallyComment
-
what it all apparently means is this rwh
CO2 is apparently not THE driver of global warming, that man's understanding of climate is insufficient to explain cause and effect of anthro souces of GHG, that previous predictions of gloom and doom are wrong“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston ChurchillComment
-
do you see a correlation in this graph?
“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston ChurchillComment
-
Comment