Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    5:45 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Thats it folks - Al Gore is all wet - we in for the ice age Back to Topics
flyboyUT

Champion Author
Utah

Posts:29,292
Points:1,651,755
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 5, 2013 1:19:22 PM

Shades of 1970 - here we go again.
.
.
>>>Better start investing in some warm clothes because German scientists are predicting that the Earth will cool over the next century.

German scientists found that two naturally occurring cycles will combine to lower global temperatures during the 21st century, eventually dropping to levels corresponding with the “little ice age” of 1870.

“Due to the de Vries cycle, the global temperature will drop until 2100 to a value corresponding to the ‘little ice age’ of 1870,” write German scientists Horst-Joachim Luedecke and Carl-Otto Weiss of the European Institute for Climate and Energy.

Researchers used historical temperature data and data from cave stalagmites to show a 200-year solar cycle, called the de Vries cycle.<<<

So we need to drill for more energy to keep us warm. Will anyone ever admit that trying to predict global weather patterns is futile.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,562
Points:2,009,560
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 30, 2015 12:10:26 PM

flyboy: "Outright fraud is the most logical answer."


Follow the money.....



mudtoe
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:29,292
Points:1,651,755
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 30, 2015 12:07:49 PM

Its beginning to look more and more like a bunch of them 'warmer' types have been fudging the data - but then we knew that didn't we.
.
.
>>>Take, for example, the Urban Heat Island effect. This is where weather stations, over time, have become surrounded by buildings or other heat sources and which therefore record hotter temperatures than they used to. You’d expect, as a result of this, that recent (ie late 20th century) raw temperature readings from urban areas would be adjusted downwards in order to make them more accurate. Rarely though, is this the case. More usually, the adjustments appear to have been made in the other direction, so that the late twentieth century readings are made hotter still – while the early twentieth century readings have been adjusted to make them look cooler.

And this isn’t just an issue with the adjustments to the Paraguay stations by the way. It has happened all over the world.

As Paul Homewood reminds us here, it has been happening everywhere from Iceland, Greenland and Russia to Alice Springs in Australia. Also, it has been reported on, at least in the climate sceptical blogosphere, for quite some time. Among the first to spot the problem was Steve McIntyre who back in 2007 observed the curious fact that where NASA’s James Hansen had once acknowledged that the 1930s was the hottest decade in the US, he subsequently amended it – with the help of some conveniently adjusted records – to the 1990s. Anthony Watts of Watts Up With That? has been reporting on this for years; as have bloggers including Steven Goddard and journalists like Christopher Booker.
.
.
But the bigger reason, of course, is this: if you make the case that all (or at least a good many) of the world’s surface temperature data records have been wantonly tampered with to the point where they are effectively useless, you are more or less accusing some of the world’s most distinguished (and lavishly funded) scientific institutions of, at best, culpable incompetence and, at worst, outright fraud.

Also, to accuse so many temperature gatekeepers of getting the details so badly wrong, you are also implying that there must be some kind of conspiracy involved, even if it is only a conspiracy of silence to cover up what a tremendous cock up they’ve made of their work over a period of years.

Finally, you are suggesting that everything we have been told about dramatic, unprecedented, man-made global warming by the alarmist establishment over the last three decades may be based on a massive lie. Think about it. The satellite records (which show no global warming for the last 18 years) only go back to the late Seventies. So for the main thesis about global warming, the scientists and policymakers who have been pushing the alarmist narrative are largely dependent on the surface temperature data (which, of course, goes back much earlier).

But if this data cannot be trusted, all bets are off. I’m not saying there has been no 2oth century global warming, I think there probably has been, but I don’t honestly know. The worrying part, though, is that neither – it would appear – do the scientists.<<<Part of the article I didn't copy is the "adjustments" as shown in the charts. Interesting for sure is putting it mildly. Outright fraud is the most logical answer.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:12,887
Points:1,195,075
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2015 10:24:52 PM

EZExit: "If they have several automated sensors that erroneously record temperatures at random as if they were in Kelvin, that will kick any average all over the place. Perhaps this is where they are figuring their ".01 degree" end of life temperatures.

By the way, I did manage to venture outside (to handle my working responsibilities), and took the heat index of 4750°F like a man!"

They're off to a great start. I predict 2015 will be the hottest on record. Mind you, not according to the satellite record - that divergence continues to widen.
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:12,887
Points:1,195,075
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2015 10:12:50 PM

RE: Alaska - unlike some areas around the globe, where the surface-station data have been interpolated and extrapolated beyond recognition and haven't resembled what the satellites recorded, Alaska was one of the places on the planet that has matched fairly closely (last year Alaska was warmer than normal, according to both satellites and surface data).

It is very similar to 1977. The jet stream caused a warm Alaska, California drought and snow in Florida. And it was cold and snowy in New York. In 1977, those phenomena were attributed to global cooling.



[Edited by: ministorage at 1/29/2015 10:16:34 PM EST]
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,815
Points:64,295
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2015 2:24:01 PM

You're actually using Mother Jones as a source, sgm4law? That is sad. How about we go beyond the "more temperate view" to some reality.

"And because of the much larger heat capacity of water compared to air, the differences in temperature would be of the order of hundredths of a degree. Which is conveniently impossible to measure accurately."

"just for the record, a [delta]E of 20 x 10E22 J equates to approximately two hundredths of one percent of estimated total ocean heat."

That 20 x 10E22 Joules, is the supposed change in heat content of the ocean, and as noted above, it is such a miniscule change that the accuracy is just not possible. It's not possible even now, and certainly wasn't possible 40 years ago.



[Edited by: HotRod10 at 1/29/2015 2:26:42 PM EST]
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,815
Points:64,295
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2015 12:51:19 PM

"I'm waiting for the church of manmade global warming to try tying the blizzard to Co2."

Wait no longer, your wish has been granted.

"Climate activist Bill McKibben, who was key organizer of the NYC climate march in September 2014, wasted no time in blaming the massive blizzard bearing down on the Northeast on ‘global warming.’"

"Not to be outdone, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo joined in:

New York governor says massive storms are ‘part of the changing climate’: Andrew Cuomo says frequency of extreme weather, such as hurricane Sandy and current blizzard sweeping across north-east, ‘is a pattern never seen before’"

"Also wading into the blizzard and ‘climate change’ connection is Bill Nye, the Science Guy.”

Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,823
Points:3,120,145
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2015 12:00:19 PM

sad

a more temperate view.

[Edited by: sgm4law at 1/29/2015 12:02:53 PM EST]
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:20,130
Points:3,302,085
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2015 1:05:11 AM

>>Thanks for the link and the tip. After sifting through the all of the records for 2014, there were only 31 stations out of the 189 reporting stations that recorded a record-breaking high temperature. That's a tad less than "EVERY station". Maybe every one of the 19 (there's 20 according to the site and my count), but your "335 record-breaking high temperatures vs. only 23 record-breaking low temps" were across all 189 stations.<<

Yes, there are 20 "first order" stations. However, Valdez had an equipment changeover in April and they didn't count it as a first order station for rest of the year, leaving 19.

You are also correct that some of those record-breaking temperatures were not from the first order stations (57 of them?). Why they would include those in their lists makes no sense, since those pages were specifically referring to the first order stations. So, I'll remove the 57 and revise my number to 278. That said, just because the vast majority of cooperative stations were not listed on those pages does not mean that they didn't have record-breaking temperatures, so you don't know if those charts "were across all 189 stations". But since 20 out of 20 first order stations - representing every region of Alaska - DID have record-breaking temperatures, and these are the ones that even the American Thinker was looking at, it is safe to say that they had record-breaking temperatures all across Alaska.

 

>>Oh, and Nick, the column I linked, in American Thinker, posted plenty of relevant numbers from Alaska to show exactly what I said it showed, as the author of that column stated.<<

Wow, I75, do you think that if you just keep writing the same thing, that'll make it any more true? The "author of that column" parsed some words, made a straw man argument out of those words, and then argued against that straw man. That's what they do at the American Thinker - make dishonest arguments, meant to fool those who are inclined to believe as they do. And from what I can tell, they're doing a pretty good job of it.

But you know what? I'm a sporting guy. So here's your chance to prove yourself right. On Jan 23, 2015 3:41:26 PM (that's eastern time), you claimed, "Here's another warmist/alarmist alarm debunked:" Then you provided lots of quotes from the American Thinker, and finally wrote "Whew". So, go ahead - prove that the American Thinker "debunked" what the so-called "warmist/alarmist" actually wrote. But you can't just say that you proved it, you have to actually PROVE it.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:17,141
Points:2,450,200
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 9:23:41 PM

175: <<<"Not to worry, EZ, the NWS and all the climate-tracking geeks will just average this reading in with the others......don't be surprised if Phoenix sets a "hottest year ever" for 2015!">>>

--Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. If they have several automated sensors that erroneously record temperatures at random as if they were in Kelvin, that will kick any average all over the place. Perhaps this is where they are figuring their ".01 degree" end of life temperatures.

By the way, I did manage to venture outside (to handle my working responsibilities), and took the heat index of 4750°F like a man!

[Edited by: EZExit at 1/28/2015 9:29:24 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:29,292
Points:1,651,755
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 8:31:26 PM

It says right here that sheep and cow flatulence is causing glowbull warming - the scientists are right we are doomed by cow farts.
.
.
>>>The U.K. government is telling people to eat less meat to fight global warming, especially meat from sheep and cows which emit methane when they (literally) pass gas.
.
.
In general, environmentalists worry that increasing global prosperity has allowed more people to eat more meat than ever before, which could drive more global warming and environmental damage. Despite the increase in meat consumption, global temperatures have remained flat for the past 18 years and three months.

Last year, the Obama administration released a national methane strategy that included cutting emissions from the dairy sector 25 percent by 2020. Republicans slammed the president for attacking dairy farmers, and warned of a potential tax on cow flatulence.

Scientists have also been looking at ways to reduce or capture methane emissions from sheep and cows. New Zealand scientists have been looking into ways to produce sheep that emit less methane. Researchers in Argentina have theorized that giant cow backpacks could be used to capture methane and turn it into green energy.<<<

Oh yeah these folks are "up in the night" it seems. Everyone call their local rancher and tell them to outfit their range cows with the 'antiflatulence backpack - Mark I Mod I'.
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:9,287
Points:1,376,835
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 8:26:59 PM

"Confusing weather and climate works both ways."

In my case the comments about the record snow was a tong in cheek shot at the scientists who said that snow would be a thing of the past by now, and at those who parroted these ridiculous claims.

These individual weather events don't really mean a thing. They do point out that the claims of doom are highly exaggerated though.
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,834
Points:3,853,210
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 7:58:00 PM

"My relatives in MA are getting buried under a meter of snow.
Yep, warmest temperatures in centuries."

And the grass in about 1/3 of my yard is visible, most unusual for January here.
Yep, the earth is cooling. LOL!!
Confusing weather and climate works both ways.
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:16,555
Points:3,723,600
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 7:07:33 PM

where's al gore?
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:9,287
Points:1,376,835
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 6:36:50 PM

I'm waiting for the church of manmade global warming to try tying the blizzard to Co2.

I know, it's not really snow it condensed Co2.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,815
Points:64,295
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 4:30:55 PM

"But of course I can provide proof. It's all there in the Alaska Statewide Climate Summary. Simply replace "Jan" with "Feb", "Mar", etc. for the rest of the months."

Thanks for the link and the tip. After sifting through the all of the records for 2014, there were only 31 stations out of the 189 reporting stations that recorded a record-breaking high temperature. That's a tad less than "EVERY station". Maybe every one of the 19 (there's 20 according to the site and my count), but your "335 record-breaking high temperatures vs. only 23 record-breaking low temps" were across all 189 stations.

It is curious that the 20 NWS "first-order" stations recorded the bulk of the high-temperature records, while the other 169 reporting stations only had 61 between them.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,883
Points:3,175,375
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 10:30:38 AM

Not to worry, EZ, the NWS and all the climate-tracking geeks will just average this reading in with the others......don't be surprised if Phoenix sets a "hottest year ever" for 2015!
 
 
 
Oh, and Nick, the column I linked, in American Thinker, posted plenty of relevant numbers from Alaska to show exactly what I said it showed, as the author of that column stated.

[Edited by: I75at7AM at 1/28/2015 10:33:20 AM EST]
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,947
Points:337,050
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 6:24:24 AM

My relatives in MA are getting buried under a meter of snow.
Yep, warmest temperatures in centuries.

After this winter expect there to be few million less alarmist global warming believers.
Some of them will have froze to death, were killed by snow plows, or buried alive in snow, but ultimately most wised up to the lefts crying wolf.
Profile Pic
mweyant
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:8,445
Points:1,674,750
Joined:Feb 2010
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 4:00:36 AM

Priceless!
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:17,141
Points:2,450,200
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 3:45:42 AM

There is no way to post a screen shot in a post, but I did the next best thing. In my profile, I posted a screen shot taken of the NOAA page that I had just taken moments ago with current conditions and the forecast for the next few days. You'll see that NOAA is really embellishing the temperatures now, check it out for yourself. ROFL!

Globull warming is real! The heat index here alone is 4750°F (2621°C)

This is the link I use for monitoring forecasts and weather conditions that my screen shot is taken from, enjoy!

National Weather Service

[Edited by: EZExit at 1/28/2015 3:48:23 AM EST]
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:20,130
Points:3,302,085
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 28, 2015 12:41:58 AM

>>I assume you can provide proof of that statement. After deriding others for "making stuff up", it would be terribly embarrassing to be caught doing it.<<

It sure would be embarrassing, HotRod. But of course I can provide proof. It's all there in the Alaska Statewide Climate Summary. Simply replace "Jan" with "Feb", "Mar", etc. for the rest of the months.

>>Having a record-breaking day once in a year is fairly common for any station, since there are 365 days in a year and less than a third that many years in the temperature records. Having them all have a record-breaking day at some point in the year, I suspect happens fairly often.<<

True, but while they all had record-breaking high temperatures, 10 of the 19 stations didn't have record-breaking low temperatures in 2014. In fact (assuming I added correctly), there were 335 record-breaking high temperatures vs. only 23 record-breaking low temps for the entire year.

 

>>Was it the warmest year of all time.
Not even close.
Nothing to debunk except the outrageous claims of 2014 being the warmest year ever, in Alaska, the Earth, or anywhere else.<<

Actually, I75, it's YOUR "outrageous claims" that are "not even close". I sure hope you're not relying on flyboy's oft-repeated and just as oft-misleading and/or factually incorrect posts (which I'll debunk when I have more time) as the basis of your latest claims.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,815
Points:64,295
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 6:29:22 PM

"And EVERY station did have occurrences of record-breaking high temperatures in 2014."

I assume you can provide proof of that statement. After deriding others for "making stuff up", it would be terribly embarrassing to be caught doing it.

Although it wouldn't be at all surprising; Having a record-breaking day once in a year is fairly common for any station, since there are 365 days in a year and less than a third that many years in the temperature records. Having them all have a record-breaking day at some point in the year, I suspect happens fairly often.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:29,292
Points:1,651,755
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 5:10:23 PM

Message Posted: Jan 23, 2015 11:13:37 AM flyboyUT

LINK {Once more the 'warmers' are caught creatively 'not telling the truth'.}
.
.
>>>The second is, as David Rose noted in the Mail On Sunday, that the criteria by which NASA declared “2014 was the hottest year on record” do not stand up to serious scientific scrutiny.

Yet the Nasa press release failed to mention this, as well as the fact that the alleged ‘record’ amounted to an increase over 2010, the previous ‘warmest year’, of just two-hundredths of a degree – or 0.02C. The margin of error is said by scientists to be approximately 0.1C – several times as much.

As a result, GISS’s director Gavin Schmidt has now admitted Nasa thinks the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38 per cent.

Odds of 38 per cent are not a racing certainty. If you translated it into a bet you’d lose more often than you’d win. NASA was lying to us. Or, at best, wilfully misleading us.

And the third problem, as Christopher Booker noted, is that the satellite temperature records tell a very different story from the surface temperature records quoted by NASA. This would suggest – as sceptics have been arguing for some time – that the land surface temperature data sets are untrustworthy. There are too few weather stations; too many of them are subject to the Urban Heat Island effect; and, in any case, the raw data has too often been adjusted by alarmists for reasons that appear to owe more to politics than science, since the adjustments always seem designed to make the early years of the 20th century cooler than they were in order to make the subsequent increases in temperature more dramatic.<<<<

.
.

.
.
"Lets see here now - the warmers are saying that they think the temps were 0.02 degrees warmer. Sounds impressive doesnt it - until you learn that the margin of error of the measurement is 0.1 degrees. What that really says is that based on their data and the accuracy of the data they have no idea if it was warmer or colder or what.

Then they top it off by saying that they have only a 38% chance of being right in their measurements ---- but the warmers are screaming to high heaven that "its the warmest year on record".
.
.
Do these idiots really expect anyone with two brain cells to believe them? Oh I forgot they are just trying to convince treehuggers and other warmer types to believe them - multiple brain cells not required....... "
.
.
.
.
.
Want to know something - this claim of warmest year on record of 0.02 degrees warmer when the best accuracy of measurement is 0.1 degrees is a sick sad sorry joke. It remeinds me of once when I ws doing an Environmental Analysis of a proposed project. The soil scientest on the team wrote a report that said our proposed project would increase erosion coming off the site about ten tons per year. Now that sounds like a lot doesnt it. But lets put it in perspective. I asked him what the natural or background level of erosion off the site was. I got a blank stare. Then I said how much erosion would we get if we did nothing. His answer was about a thousand tons PLUS OR MINUS 10 THOUSAND TONS DEPENDING ON SUMMER STORMS AND SPRING SNOWMELT. So then I said your cant tell me what effect if any the project will have because there is no way of knowing if there is more or less erosion.

.
.
.

Guess what - telling me that temps went up 0.02 degrees when yo can only measure to the nearest 0.1 degree and you think your 0.02 measurement is only right 38% of the time is totally meaningless. It is JUNK SCIENCE.

[Edited by: flyboyUT at 1/27/2015 5:13:00 PM EST]
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,883
Points:3,175,375
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 4:49:36 PM

From my link:
Was 2014 an unusually warm year for Alaska.
Certainly.

Was it the warmest year of all time.

Not even close.

Nothing to debunk except the outrageous claims of 2014 being the warmest year ever, in Alaska, the Earth, or anywhere else.
Profile Pic
NickHammer
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:20,130
Points:3,302,085
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 3:32:28 PM

>>Here's another warmist/alarmist alarm debunked:<<

Sorry, I75, neither you nor the ironically named American Thinker debunked anything.

The American "Thinker" nitpicks one part of one sentence from an opinion piece talking about protecting salmon, then laughingly claims, 'Only 7 of these 19 climate sub-regions experienced record warmth in 2014, far from the "record-breaking temperatures occurring all across the state" claimed in the Juneau Empire article.'

Just like it can be really cold in the eastern U.S. but still be the warmest year GLOBALLY, not EVERY primary weather station in Alaska must break the annual record for Alaska to have its overall warmest year. Only a complete idiot would think otherwise.

But 7 of the 19 stations, ranging over 500 miles from southern to western Alaska, did have their warmest year - that's a lot. And EVERY station did have occurrences of record-breaking high temperatures in 2014.
So, did "record-breaking temperatures occur all across the state"? Yes, they most certainly did.

This is just another case of deniers mocking others and making stuff up, because that's their last line of defense when the facts don't go their way.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,487
Points:833,035
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 2:48:31 PM



jeskibuff, "Now certified moron Bill Nye is trying to blame the blizzard on climate change."

You are right, a "certified moron" progressive liberal.

Have you also noticed that sgm4law has THREE morons in her avatar as her heroes?

Bill Nye
Neil deGrasse Tyson and
Barack Obama

The "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" moron monkeys!

All of the touting global warming/climate change.

ROTFL



[Edited by: AnotherOne at 1/27/2015 2:49:07 PM EST]
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,883
Points:3,175,375
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 2:46:41 PM

Only because the warmist/alarmists insist that we keep on chasing wild geese.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:25,422
Points:3,908,165
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 2:43:43 PM

EZ said, "Even when they're wrong, they'll be right",

AND the taxpayer cash will keep flowing.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:17,141
Points:2,450,200
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 2:39:04 PM

Mudtoe: <<<"That's why they renamed it to "climate change", because the real climate wasn't cooperating anymore with "global warming". That's what the left always does with its failures; it renames them, hoping the public will forget what a total failure they and their policies really are.">>>

--You are only producing part of the picture. Before "global warming" and "climate change", they were selling "global cooling" in the 1970's. Don't you remember that picture (Time and/or Newsweek) of earth taken from from space showing it mostly frozen over? "Global warming" was postulated after it was found that the climate during the 1970's was trending warmer. Now as of recently, it has shown to be cooling again, and now a more generic "climate change" has been adopted, it covers everything, no matter which way the earth's cycles are trending. Even when they're wrong, they'll be right, LOL!

It is simply a matter of covering all your bases, you see.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:25,422
Points:3,908,165
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 2:05:50 PM

Did you know there was a CONSENSUS among meteorologists that NYC would get at least two feet of snow?
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,562
Points:2,009,560
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 11:07:31 AM

jsk: " If it doesn't snow, they blame it on climate change. If it snows, they blame it on climate change."


That's why they renamed it to "climate change", because the real climate wasn't cooperating anymore with "global warming". That's what the left always does with its failures; it renames them, hoping the public will forget what a total failure they and their policies really are.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:11,280
Points:2,170,730
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 11:02:58 AM

Now certified moron Bill Nye is trying to blame the blizzard on climate change. What idiots these climate change monkeys are! If it doesn't snow, they blame it on climate change. If it snows, they blame it on climate change. Whether black or white, hot or cold, they somehow think they can twist events to suit their agenda. That's okay by me...they can make fools out of themselves however they choose. It's just the people who BELIEVE in these idiots instead of laughing at them...that's what boggles my mind!

[Edited by: jeskibuff at 1/27/2015 11:04:31 AM EST]
Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:12,887
Points:1,195,075
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Jan 27, 2015 9:56:21 AM

Snow is a thing of the past.

A year since the New York Times announced the end of snow

Fifteen years since UK's The Independent announced the end of snow
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,815
Points:64,295
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 23, 2015 8:16:50 PM

"Follow the money."

Bingo!!!

That's been the answer to every time thinking people shake their heads and wonder "How can anyone fall for this scam?"

There are the perpetrators, and then there are the gullible sheep who fall for it because the perpetrators have lots of letters after their name. Too bad having "PhD" after your name doesn't mean you are an ethical person.
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:16,047
Points:687,990
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Jan 23, 2015 3:50:10 PM

"then why are so many people who ought to know better continuing to claim otherwise?<<<"

Follow the money.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,883
Points:3,175,375
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jan 23, 2015 3:41:26 PM

Here's another warmist/alarmist alarm debunked:

Record warmth in 2014 all across Alaska? Not likely

"The National Weather Service reports that 2014 was Alaska's warmest year on record."

"The warmest year with record-breaking temperatures all across the state? That doesn't ring true."

"Only 7 of these 19 climate sub-regions experienced record warmth in 2014, far from the "record-breaking temperatures occurring all across the state" claimed in the Juneau Empire article."

"Was 2014 a warmer than average year in Alaska? Certainly. Was it a record warm year for the state?"
"Is the state in a significant warming trend over the past few decades? Probably not. Actually, "on the balance of probabilities, the state appears to be cooling."

"And the northern state most definitely did not have record warmth all across it in 2014."

Whew!
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,562
Points:2,009,560
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 23, 2015 1:40:13 PM

I always like the part where they ignore the satellite data because it's not subject to "normalization" (i.e. manipulation to achieve a desired result).


mudtoe
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:29,292
Points:1,651,755
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 23, 2015 1:13:37 PM

Once more the 'warmers' are caught creatively 'not telling the truth'.
.
.
>>>The second is, as David Rose noted in the Mail On Sunday, that the criteria by which NASA declared “2014 was the hottest year on record” do not stand up to serious scientific scrutiny.

Yet the Nasa press release failed to mention this, as well as the fact that the alleged ‘record’ amounted to an increase over 2010, the previous ‘warmest year’, of just two-hundredths of a degree – or 0.02C. The margin of error is said by scientists to be approximately 0.1C – several times as much.

As a result, GISS’s director Gavin Schmidt has now admitted Nasa thinks the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38 per cent.

Odds of 38 per cent are not a racing certainty. If you translated it into a bet you’d lose more often than you’d win. NASA was lying to us. Or, at best, wilfully misleading us.

And the third problem, as Christopher Booker noted, is that the satellite temperature records tell a very different story from the surface temperature records quoted by NASA. This would suggest – as sceptics have been arguing for some time – that the land surface temperature data sets are untrustworthy. There are too few weather stations; too many of them are subject to the Urban Heat Island effect; and, in any case, the raw data has too often been adjusted by alarmists for reasons that appear to owe more to politics than science, since the adjustments always seem designed to make the early years of the 20th century cooler than they were in order to make the subsequent increases in temperature more dramatic.

Now you’ve got the background, let me return to my question.

If the statement “2014 was the hottest year on record” is untrue – and demonstrably untrue – then why are so many people who ought to know better continuing to claim otherwise?<<<
.
.
.
Lets see here now - the warmers are saying that they think the temps were 0.02 degrees warmer. Sounds impressive doesnt it - until you learn that the margin of error of the measurement is 0.1 degrees. What that really says is that based on their data and the accuracy of the data they have no idea if it was warmer or colder or what.

Then they top it off by saying that they have only a 38% chance of being right in their measurements ---- but the warmers are screaming to high heaven that "its the warmest year on record".
.
.
Do these idiots really expect anyone with two brain cells to believe them? Oh I forgot they are just trying to convince treehuggers and other warmer types to believe them - multiple brain cells not required.......
.
.
.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,487
Points:833,035
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 4:29:53 PM



AnotherOne, "I have for years said that YES there has been global warming."

HotRod, "Not for the last 18 years."

I totally agree with you, HotRod! You are absolutely right.

But the operative word is "has been".

There 'has been' warming since the last Ice Age.

When progressive liberals can explain what caused that warming long before all of Algore's HOT AIR warmed the planet, then I will believe they MIGHT have a clue of what they are talking about.

The Senate resolution does not say there has been ANY 'manmade warming'. Period!

This political trick of the SLEAZY progressive liberal Democrats has blown up in their faces!

ROTFL



[Edited by: AnotherOne at 1/22/2015 4:30:19 PM EST]
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,815
Points:64,295
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 4:19:25 PM

"I have for years said that YES there has been global warming."

Not for the last 18 years.

"Who knew the Senate had any sense?"

They obviously don't. They haven't in a long time.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,823
Points:3,120,145
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 1:10:48 PM

Who knew the Senate had any sense?
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:23,167
Points:334,965
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 1:08:46 PM

"It is the sense of the Senate that climate change is real and not a hoax."
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:29,292
Points:1,651,755
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 1:07:03 PM

MIT Climate Scientist: Global Warming Believers a ‘Cult’
.
.
>>>An MIT professor of meteorology is dismissing global-warming alarmists as a discredited “cult” whose members are becoming more hysterical as emerging evidence continues to contradict their beliefs.

During an appearance on this writer’s radio show Monday, MIT Professor emeritus Richard Lindzen discussed the religious nature of the movement.

“As with any cult, once the mythology of the cult begins falling apart, instead of saying, oh, we were wrong, they get more and more fanatical. I think that’s what’s happening here. Think about it,” he said. “You’ve led an unpleasant life, you haven’t led a very virtuous life, but now you’re told, you get absolution if you watch your carbon footprint. It’s salvation!”

Lindzen, 74, has issued calm dismissals of warmist apocalypse, reducing his critics to sputtering rage.

Last week, government agencies including NASA announced that 2014 was the “hottest year” in “recorded history,” as The New York Times put it in an early edition. Last year has since been demoted by the Times to the hottest “since record-keeping began in 1880.”

But that may not be true. Now the same agencies have acknowledged that there’s only a 38 percent chance that 2014 was the hottest year on record. And even if it was, it was only by two-100ths of a degree.

Lindzen scoffs at the public-sector-generated hysteria, which included one warmist blogger breathlessly writing that the heat record had been “shattered.”

“Seventy percent of the earth is oceans, we can’t measure those temperatures very well. They can be off a half a degree, a quarter of a degree. Even two-10ths of a degree of change would be tiny but two-100ths is ludicrous. Anyone who starts crowing about those numbers shows that they’re putting spin on nothing.”
.
.
Lindzen said he was fortunate to have gained tenure just as the “climate change” movement was beginning, because now non-believers are often ostracized in academia. In his career he has watched the hysteria of the 1970’s over “global cooling” morph into “global warming.”

“They use climate to push an agenda. But what do you have left when global warming falls apart? Global normalcy? We have to do something about ‘normalcy?’”

As for CO2, Lindzen said that until recently, periods of greater warmth were referred to as “climate optimum.” Optimum is derived from a Latin word meaning “best.”

“Nobody ever questioned that those were the good periods. All of a sudden you were able to inculcate people with the notion that you have to be afraid of warmth.”

The warmists’ ultimate solution is to reduce the standard of living for most of mankind. That proposition is being resisted most vigorously by nations with developing economies such as China and India, both of which have refused to sign on to any restrictive, Obama-backed climate treaties. Lindzen understands their reluctance.

“Anything you do to impoverish people, and certainly all the planned policies will impoverish people, is actually costing lives. But the environmental movement has never cared about that.”<<<
.
.
.
.
.
The last sentence is the most telling it seems. The treehuggers dont care what the cost is of their cult religion.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,487
Points:833,035
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 12:22:08 AM



Let me point out that the Senate bill did NOT say MAN MADE global warming was real.

But Obama and the DISHONEST progressive liberals will endlessly SPIN it that way.

I have for years said that YES there has been global warming.

But it is NATURAL!

It is NOT caused by man.

Man can destroy everything that modern technology has built and the earth will not care one whit.

It is liberals that are MINDLESS in their religious belief that man has caused the warming and that man can do ANYTHING about it.

That is the LIE of liberals.

Profile Pic
ministorage
Champion Author Louisville

Posts:12,887
Points:1,195,075
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 11:02:27 PM

The vote was about manipulation, just like the faux 97%, just like hiding the fact the satellites never ever recorded record heat for 2014. Obama and the Democrats - and the mainstream media - are satellite deniers. They're either old tech luddites or cons purposefully trying to fool the public. Take your pick.

[Edited by: ministorage at 1/21/2015 11:12:26 PM EST]
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:74,883
Points:3,175,375
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 10:55:59 PM

Well guys, that's it. The show is over. Pack up the beer kegs, call off the dogs. They have won.
The United States Senate voted Wednesday to agree that climate change "is real and not a hoax." "The United States Senate voted Wednesday to agree that climate change "is real and not a hoax.""

Wait.....maybe all is not lost.....
Senate says climate change real, but Can’t Agree on What’s Causing It
You see, Inhofe has not, however, changed his view that the rise in global temperatures has anything to do with human activity.
In fact, Inhofe Calls 0bama’s Climate Agenda A ‘Wealth Redistribution Scheme’
Looking Back: James Inhofe: Seven memorable lines from US's most famous (and most influential) climate change denier

Aha! The climate IS CHANGING and has been since before human time.
Inhofe grants that fact.
Move on from there.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,562
Points:2,009,560
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 2:24:47 PM

Hemond: "Obama's speech last night was notable for its lack of facts on global warming."


Facts are the enemy of the left. Emotions, especially negative ones, are what the left thrives upon.



mudtoe
Profile Pic
Hemond
Champion Author Providence

Posts:12,405
Points:183,005
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 1:54:31 PM

QUOTe BTC:::::So facts are now just "talking points" according to the right and scientists are not to be trusted. Ok. Got it.:::


Obama's speech last night was notable for its lack of facts on global warming. Obama and a baby's diaper have much in common - they need to be changed , and for the same reason.
Profile Pic
HotRod10
Champion Author Wyoming

Posts:3,815
Points:64,295
Joined:Oct 2006
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 9:52:21 AM

"0bama is indeed a fool for listening to the "scientists" who keep foisting up these outrageous claims about 2014 and global warming in general."

You give him too little (or too much?) credit. Obama isn't a fool; he knows it's a hoax as much as everyone else, but it's a hoax that gets him what he wants.

"So facts are now just "talking points" according to the right and scientists are not to be trusted."

No, facts are facts and Obama's talking points on global warming are just like everything else he says - fantasy. The yes-men at NASA and NOAA have ceased to be scientists in favor of more lucrative careers as propagandists.

[Edited by: HotRod10 at 1/21/2015 9:57:36 AM EST]
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,487
Points:833,035
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 9:52:00 AM



ldheinz, "Hemond - "I'm not a scientist but I know plenty. I listen to scientists at NOAA and NASA"

No, you don't KNOW anything, you'll BELIEVE anything."

ld, Hemond was simply quoting Obama from the State of the Union last night. He wasn't saying that.

Obama said it.

Profile Pic
WES03
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,468
Points:1,904,310
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 8:33:22 AM

"2014 was warmest year in history
14 of the 15 years of this century have been the warmest on record"

Make that recent history. Greenland once supported agriculture )about 1000 years ago).

Many of the warmest records cited here come from hot spots in and around metropolitan areas where pavement abounds, and vehicles and air conditioners pump hot air into the atmosphere 24/7.

Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:23,780
Points:902,355
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Jan 21, 2015 8:12:38 AM

Hemond, " He regurgitated every BS liberal talking point.

2014 was warmest year in history
14 of the 15 years of this century have been the warmest on record
I'm not a scientist but I know plenty. I listen to scientists at NOAA and NASA"

So facts are now just "talking points" according to the right and scientists are not to be trusted. Ok. Got it.

SMH

[Edited by: btc1 at 1/21/2015 8:13:33 AM EST]
Post a reply Back to Topics