2009 second warmest year on record

Guess you missed this little news flash, Skippy:

Climategate goes American: NOAA, GISS and the mystery of the vanishing weather stations – Telegraph Blogs

GISS and NOAA took their temperature data from 6,000 weather stations around the world. By 1990, though, this figure had mysteriously dropped to 1500. Even more mysteriously this 75 per cent reduction in the number of stations used had a clear bias against those at higher latitudes and elevations.

Yup....NASA and NOAA have been faking the numbers, too. :lol:
 
Faking numbers, hiding stations and taking more temp readings from urban areas.

They have an agenda and they keep getting caught.

Move on... it was hotter during the dark ages....
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
Faking numbers, hiding stations and taking more temp readings from urban areas.

They have an agenda and they keep getting caught.

Move on... it was hotter during the dark ages....



Its all a big conspiracy! Black helicopters! Black helicopters! Black helicopters! Black helicopters!


Damned urban temperature stations with their inner city lingo! I can't understand what they are saying.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
If the only person with the "evidence" is someone who is a proven liar in the first sentence on their page:

"James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything"

then you don't have anything.
 


Does it strike you as at all strange that NASA, the agency in charge of Space Flight, and Rockets is using land based temperature measuring stations which they proclaim to be innaccurate since they must adjust the readings for accuracy?

Does it strike you as odd that NASA, the agency in charge of space flight, ignors the opportunity to use perfectly good satellites to collect data?

Does it stike you as odd that NASA, the agency in charge of space flight, is getting funding to study climate?

All of these things strike me as being odd.

All of that aside, though, the current warming trend started before the Industrial Revolution started. This means the uptick in the warming started BEFORE the uptick in the CO2. What makes you think that the warming which started without the aid of Anthropogenic CO2 requires Anthropogenic CO2 to continue?
 
If the only person with the "evidence" is someone who is a proven liar in the first sentence on their page:

"James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything"

then you don't have anything.
The story has several links to factual information.

Your pedantic and limp ad homenim fails yet again.
 
james delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything.


rotflmao
I've read some of his work. He is basically a koolaide drinker so I pretty much discount whatever he says.

Most of his "facts" turn out to be the opinions of other people that also suffer from confirmation bias.

But you know, if it is posted on a blog, the rightwingnuts take it as gospel.
 
and the hits just keep-a-comin' for the climate alarmists!!!
UN climate change expert: there could be more errors in report

UN climate change expert: there could be more errors in report - Times Online

Wow, what an effective conspiracy. They publish their errors online

It was not a conspiracy, it's was a hoax. The data was faked. There is no AGW, and never was. As hard as they tried, the is no CAUSATION. Sorry, it is going to be hard for the zealots who bought into the religious aspects of AGW to accept that they were fooled. You might consider a AA type 12 step program. Good luck.
 
NASA is faking global warming on purpose?

I can accept this COULD be because of a government conspiracy to promote cap and tax.

Then again the global warming theory predates this crazy cap and trade idea.

How about we cancel cap and trade and just go to limit, regulate and jail. That takes away any plausible reason government could want to fake climate data.
 

Forum List

Back
Top