US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Giss shows that we had the second warmest Oct

This is a discussion on Giss shows that we had the second warmest Oct within the Environment forums, part of the US Discussion category; Giss shows that we had the second warmest oct at .69c http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt...


Go Back   US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum > US Discussion > Environment

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 11-17-2012, 02:07 AM
Matthew's Avatar
Meteorologist
Member #22889
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portland Oregon
Posts: 24,294
Thanks: 10,785
Thanked 4,379 Times in 3,347 Posts
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 3 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 1839
Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute
Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute Matthew has a reputation beyond repute
Giss shows that we had the second warmest Oct

Giss shows that we had the second warmest oct at .69c

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
USMessageBoard.com is the premier Political Forum Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see these ads. Please Register - It's Free!
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 11-17-2012, 02:09 AM
RetiredGySgt's Avatar
Registered User
Member #5176
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 33,697
Thanks: 40
Thanked 6,515 Times in 4,020 Posts
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 3218
RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute
RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute RetiredGySgt has a reputation beyond repute
Quote: Originally Posted by Matthew View Post
Giss shows that we had the second warmest oct at .69c

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt
Once again the temperature has gone up 1.5 or so degrees. Of course temperatures are likely to be higher then previously because the temperature is higher over all.
__________________
The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd. Indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.
-Bertrand Russell

Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable
-Laurence J. Peters
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 11-17-2012, 04:41 AM
IanC's Avatar
Registered User
Member #21028
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,805
Thanks: 794
Thanked 1,572 Times in 1,184 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 445
IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by Matthew View Post
Giss shows that we had the second warmest oct at .69c

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt
from your link-
Quote:
sources: GHCN-v3 1880-10/2012 + SST: 1880-11/1981 HadISST1
12/1981-10/2012 Reynolds v2
using elimination of outliers and homogeneity adjustment
with all the bogus adjustments, station drop-outs, etc, do you really think that there is a legitimate comparison between years?
__________________
There is no more common error than to assume that, because prolonged and accurate mathematical calculations have been made, the application of the result to some fact of nature is absolutely certain. -Whitehead

”The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” (Bertrand Russell).
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 11-17-2012, 04:43 PM
SSDD's Avatar
Registered User
Member #40906
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,342
Thanks: 474
Thanked 1,082 Times in 820 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 620
SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet
Quote: Originally Posted by IanC View Post
with all the bogus adjustments, station drop-outs, etc, do you really think that there is a legitimate comparison between years?
Highly doubtable. I don't believe there is a record out there that is reliable. Recently spencer was talking about making adjustments to his data base beause the satellite is slowly drifting away from accurate measurements. It seems that even UAH is little more than fancy guesswork any more.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 11-17-2012, 08:40 PM
Registered User
Member #13758
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, Ore.
Posts: 32,076
Thanks: 12,396
Thanked 6,489 Times in 4,817 Posts
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 2656
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
And, of course, the pictures of the Artic Ica Cap are all photoshoped.

But, rejoice, you people have won. There will be no reduction in GHGs produced worldwide. In fact, as the world economy improves, we will increase the amount of GHGs put into the atmosphere, and ignore the consequences that we are seeing increase every year now.

The scientists vastly underestimated the sensitvity of the climate. The Arctic Ice was not supposed to be where it was at this summer until about 2080. And we were not supposed to be seeing the kind of extreme weather events that we are presenty seeing until past 2050.

But, it doesn't matter. It will be ignored until something really catastrophic happens in this nation.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 11-17-2012, 09:15 PM
Supporting Member
Member #27324
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Western Va.
Posts: 16,515
Thanks: 3
Thanked 5,687 Times in 3,828 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 3119
whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute
whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute
Who is "GISS" and why does the radical left accept the acronym's alleged data? It sounds good?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:14 AM
IanC's Avatar
Registered User
Member #21028
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,805
Thanks: 794
Thanked 1,572 Times in 1,184 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 445
IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by whitehall View Post
Who is "GISS" and why does the radical left accept the acronym's alleged data? It sounds good?
Goddard Institute of Space Studies. a division of NASA that studies climate change and keeps temperature data sets.

thermometer readings have been keep for 150 years. the thermometers have changed, the time and number of readings per day have changed, the station locations have changed, the environment around the stations have changed, the number of included stations have changed (affecting the altitude and latitude averages), the designation of rural and urban has changed. but especially, the methodologies behind how to correct for these changes has steadily evolved over the last few decades and has lead to adjustments that are a very large fraction of the trend that they have found. all new versions have increased the trend except for the hurried correction in 2007 when the Canadian skeptic Stephen McIntyre found a Y2K bug.

most people and govts accept these values because there are no other independent data sets. the satellite data since 1979 show a cooler but still increasing trend. Berkeley's BEST program developed a data set using as much of the station data as possible which initially showed even higher trends but the papers have been stranded in peer review for more than a year now. not a good sign for their results.
__________________
There is no more common error than to assume that, because prolonged and accurate mathematical calculations have been made, the application of the result to some fact of nature is absolutely certain. -Whitehead

”The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” (Bertrand Russell).
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:30 AM
Registered User
Member #30967
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,018
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,888 Times in 1,411 Posts
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 1063
Politico could be on the Supreme Court
Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court Politico could be on the Supreme Court
Cool. I get an extra month of growing season.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 11-18-2012, 02:31 AM
IanC's Avatar
Registered User
Member #21028
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,805
Thanks: 794
Thanked 1,572 Times in 1,184 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 445
IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness IanC may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by Old Rocks View Post
And, of course, the pictures of the Artic Ica Cap are all photoshoped.

But, rejoice, you people have won. There will be no reduction in GHGs produced worldwide. In fact, as the world economy improves, we will increase the amount of GHGs put into the atmosphere, and ignore the consequences that we are seeing increase every year now.

The scientists vastly underestimated the sensitvity of the climate. The Arctic Ice was not supposed to be where it was at this summer until about 2080. And we were not supposed to be seeing the kind of extreme weather events that we are presenty seeing until past 2050.

But, it doesn't matter. It will be ignored until something really catastrophic happens in this nation.
I can only hope that you are right Old Rocks, and that the skeptics will prevail in showing how exaggerated and distorted the science has been concerning global warming. it would be a welcome change to see data driving the conclusions rather than the current situation where predetermined conclusions are backed up with cherrypicked data and knowingly incorrect and incomplete methodologies.
__________________
There is no more common error than to assume that, because prolonged and accurate mathematical calculations have been made, the application of the result to some fact of nature is absolutely certain. -Whitehead

”The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” (Bertrand Russell).
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to IanC For This Useful Post:
SSDD (11-18-2012)
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 11-18-2012, 05:14 AM
SSDD's Avatar
Registered User
Member #40906
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,342
Thanks: 474
Thanked 1,082 Times in 820 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 620
SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet
Quote: Originally Posted by Old Rocks View Post
And, of course, the pictures of the Artic Ica Cap are all photoshoped.
Sat images of surface melting do register as open water which calls much of the sat data on the ice cap into question.

Recently published papers are calling ice loss data into question.

http://theresilientearth.com/?q=cont...-loss-cut-half

Quote: Originally Posted by Old Rocks View Post
But, rejoice, you people have won. There will be no reduction in GHGs produced worldwide. In fact, as the world economy improves, we will increase the amount of GHGs put into the atmosphere, and ignore the consequences that we are seeing increase every year now.
Science and observation are winning. CO2 continues to rise but 16 years have passed now with no warming at all, and the so called fingerprints of man made warming are simply not there. In short, man's influence on the global climate if it exists is not separable from natural variation. Will it take another ice age with atmospheric levels above 400 to convince you that you, and a great many others bet on the wrong horse and latched on to a terribly flawed hypothesis in large part to your political beliefs rather than any hard science?

And exactly what are these "more consequences" you are talking about? Model results aren't data and there are no observable consequences that are related to greenhouse gasses.

Quote: Originally Posted by Old Rocks View Post
The scientists vastly underestimated the sensitvity of the climate. The Arctic Ice was not supposed to be where it was at this summer until about 2080. And we were not supposed to be seeing the kind of extreme weather events that we are presenty seeing until past 2050.
Observation, and a rather large rash of recently published papers tells us that science has grossly overestimated the sensitivity of the climate as well as the effects of climate change Here are just a few .

Climate Sensitivity Estimated from Temperature Reconstructions of the Last Glacial Maximum
New study in Science shows climate sensitivity overestimated | Watts Up With That?
Climate CO2 Sensitivity Overestimated | The Resilient Earth
On the warming in the tropical upper troposphere: Models versus observations
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Whoops: paper finds supposed positive feedback from low clouds in models is exaggerated 50%
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: New paper shows models significantly underestimate cooling from clouds
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: New paper finds models have it wrong again & predict excessive droughts

Ice Sheet Loss Cut In Half | The Resilient Earth


Quote: Originally Posted by Old Rocks View Post
But, it doesn't matter. It will be ignored until something really catastrophic happens in this nation.
How long does nothing have to continue to happen before you wake up. The one most blatant "fingerprint" claimed to prove manmade climate change.....the hotspot.....is simply not there. That in and of itself falsifies the unfalsifiable hypothesis but you guys continue to beleive and accept and regurgitate whatever you are told even when it flies in the face of observation.

Repeat after me.....models are not data.....models are not data.....models are not data.....

model predictions do not supercede observation......model predictions do not supercede observation......model predictions do not supercede observation....

Last edited by SSDD; 11-18-2012 at 05:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to SSDD For This Useful Post:
IanC (11-19-2012)
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 11-25-2012, 07:11 PM
Registered User
Member #13758
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, Ore.
Posts: 32,076
Thanks: 12,396
Thanked 6,489 Times in 4,817 Posts
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 2656
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
Quote: Originally Posted by whitehall View Post
Who is "GISS" and why does the radical left accept the acronym's alleged data? It sounds good?
Crap! You actually are asking that after posting all the shit you have posted? Ever hear of google? The word research have any meaning for you?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 11-25-2012, 07:12 PM
Registered User
Member #13758
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, Ore.
Posts: 32,076
Thanks: 12,396
Thanked 6,489 Times in 4,817 Posts
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 2656
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
Quote: Originally Posted by ssdd View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by old rocks View Post
and, of course, the pictures of the artic ica cap are all photoshoped.
sat images of surface melting do register as open water which calls much of the sat data on the ice cap into question.

Recently published papers are calling ice loss data into question.

Ice Sheet Loss Cut In Half | The Resilient Earth

Quote: Originally Posted by old rocks View Post
but, rejoice, you people have won. There will be no reduction in ghgs produced worldwide. In fact, as the world economy improves, we will increase the amount of ghgs put into the atmosphere, and ignore the consequences that we are seeing increase every year now.
science and observation are winning. Co2 continues to rise but 16 years have passed now with no warming at all, and the so called fingerprints of man made warming are simply not there. In short, man's influence on the global climate if it exists is not separable from natural variation. Will it take another ice age with atmospheric levels above 400 to convince you that you, and a great many others bet on the wrong horse and latched on to a terribly flawed hypothesis in large part to your political beliefs rather than any hard science?

And exactly what are these "more consequences" you are talking about? Model results aren't data and there are no observable consequences that are related to greenhouse gasses.

Quote: Originally Posted by old rocks View Post
the scientists vastly underestimated the sensitvity of the climate. The arctic ice was not supposed to be where it was at this summer until about 2080. And we were not supposed to be seeing the kind of extreme weather events that we are presenty seeing until past 2050.
observation, and a rather large rash of recently published papers tells us that science has grossly overestimated the sensitivity of the climate as well as the effects of climate change here are just a few .

climate sensitivity estimated from temperature reconstructions of the last glacial maximum
new study in science shows climate sensitivity overestimated | watts up with that?
climate co2 sensitivity overestimated | the resilient earth
on the warming in the tropical upper troposphere: Models versus observations
the hockey schtick: Whoops: Paper finds supposed positive feedback from low clouds in models is exaggerated 50%
the hockey schtick: New paper shows models significantly underestimate cooling from clouds
the hockey schtick: New paper finds models have it wrong again & predict excessive droughts

ice sheet loss cut in half | the resilient earth


Quote: Originally Posted by old rocks View Post
but, it doesn't matter. It will be ignored until something really catastrophic happens in this nation.
how long does nothing have to continue to happen before you wake up. The one most blatant "fingerprint" claimed to prove manmade climate change.....the hotspot.....is simply not there. That in and of itself falsifies the unfalsifiable hypothesis but you guys continue to beleive and accept and regurgitate whatever you are told even when it flies in the face of observation.

Repeat after me.....models are not data.....models are not data.....models are not data.....

Model predictions do not supercede observation......model predictions do not supercede observation......model predictions do not supercede observation....
gigo
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 11-25-2012, 07:35 PM
Supporting Member
Member #27324
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Western Va.
Posts: 16,515
Thanks: 3
Thanked 5,687 Times in 3,828 Posts
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 3119
whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute
whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute whitehall has a reputation beyond repute
The US didn't cause it. We didn't do it. There are theories that the world is emerging from a 10,000 year geological cycle of ice ages. We should be happy but the radical left turns even good news into a crisis. There is no reason for a global extortion scheme designed to reduce the US to a 3rd world country.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to whitehall For This Useful Post:
Matthew (11-25-2012)
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 11-26-2012, 03:49 AM
SSDD's Avatar
Registered User
Member #40906
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,342
Thanks: 474
Thanked 1,082 Times in 820 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 620
SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet SSDD is faster than a speeding bullet
Quote: Originally Posted by Matthew View Post
Giss shows that we had the second warmest oct at .69c

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt
When are you guys going to stop taking these people seriously?

NASA GISS caught changing past data again – violates Data Quality Act | Watts Up With That?

Data Tampering At USHCN/GISS | Real Science

Another Smoking GISS/USHCN Nuke | Real Science

Hiding The La Nina At GISS | Real Science

Data Tampering: GISS Caught Red-Handed Manipulating Data To Produce Arctic Climate History Revision
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 11-26-2012, 04:11 AM
Registered User
Member #13758
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, Ore.
Posts: 32,076
Thanks: 12,396
Thanked 6,489 Times in 4,817 Posts
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 2656
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute Old Rocks has a reputation beyond repute
Your sources are simply gigo. Real science from real scientists;

AGW Observer
Reply With Quote
Reply


Lower Navigation
Go Back   US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum > US Discussion > Environment
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:45 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.