2011 9th Warmest Year in Satellite Record

[OohPooPahDoo]

Then show me a single peer reviewed paper made by the AGW supporters in the 20 years before this one, where natural variability was even mentioned much less acknowledged, as a possible source of the warming trend of the 80's and 90's.

\
solar variability global warming - Google Scholar

Top hit.

Ummmm, I said from one of your AGW supporters. Did I not? There are plenty of papers attributing warming to natural cycles from sceptics and unafiliated scientists. How about from the warmist side?

Did you read the fucking abstract?

In particular, the Sun cannot have contributed more than 30% to the steep temperature
increase that has taken place since then,

What is the "warmist" side exactly?

 

[RollingThunder]

Looks like cooling to me. Only the ninth warmest? The hockey stick has a big chunk out of it right now.

You still wouldn't know the first thing about the 'hockey stick' if it was up your dumb ass, you clueless retard.

Apparently worth repeating - from post #2 of this thread.
"Looking at every consecutive twelve month period on record and comparing it every other 12 month period on record, the very recent period from June 2009 to May 2010 was, in fact, the warmest 'year' on record since widespread record keeping began in the late 1800's. The first half of 2010 was so hot that only the beginning of a new La Nina period in mid 2010 kept the year from being the hottest year on record by a large margin rather than just ending up being tied with 2005 as the formal 'hottest year on record'."

 

[saveliberty]

Looks like cooling to me. Only the ninth warmest? The hockey stick has a big chunk out of it right now.

You still wouldn't know the first thing about the 'hockey stick' if it was up your dumb ass, you clueless retard.

Apparently worth repeating - from post #2 of this thread.
"Looking at every consecutive twelve month period on record and comparing it every other 12 month period on record, the very recent period from June 2009 to May 2010 was, in fact, the warmest 'year' on record since widespread record keeping began in the late 1800's. The first half of 2010 was so hot that only the beginning of a new La Nina period in mid 2010 kept the year from being the hottest year on record by a large margin rather than just ending up being tied with 2005 as the formal 'hottest year on record'."

Though I doubt 2011 was even the ninth warmest, it still flies in the face of CO2 Faither claims we are influencing an atomospheric warm up. Please, it will amuse me to hear your explanation of how we are in a period of consecutive warming periods.

 

[RollingThunder]

Looks like cooling to me. Only the ninth warmest? The hockey stick has a big chunk out of it right now.

You still wouldn't know the first thing about the 'hockey stick' if it was up your dumb ass, you clueless retard.

Apparently worth repeating - from post #2 of this thread.
"Looking at every consecutive twelve month period on record and comparing it every other 12 month period on record, the very recent period from June 2009 to May 2010 was, in fact, the warmest 'year' on record since widespread record keeping began in the late 1800's. The first half of 2010 was so hot that only the beginning of a new La Nina period in mid 2010 kept the year from being the hottest year on record by a large margin rather than just ending up being tied with 2005 as the formal 'hottest year on record'."

Though I doubt 2011 was even the ninth warmest, it still flies in the face of CO2 Faither claims we are influencing an atomospheric warm up. Please, it will amuse me to hear your explanation of how we are in a period of consecutive warming periods.

Your comments are so stupid and clueless, they're totally meaningless.

 

[code1211]

No, not all of a sudden.



No one has ignored natural variability for two decades.



There are no seafaring vessels involved in this discussion.

Then show me a single peer reviewed paper made by the AGW supporters in the 20 years before this one, where natural variability was even mentioned much less acknowledged, as a possible source of the warming trend of the 80's and 90's.

FAQ 2.1 - AR4 WGI Chapter 2: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing

How do Human Activities Contribute to Climate Change and How do They Compare with Natural Influences?

Human activities contribute to climate change by causing changes in Earth’s atmosphere in the amounts of greenhouse gases, aerosols (small particles), and cloudiness. The largest known contribution comes from the burning of fossil fuels, which releases carbon dioxide gas to the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases and aerosols affect climate by altering incoming solar radiation and out- going infrared (thermal) radiation that are part of Earth’s energy balance. Changing the atmospheric abundance or properties of these gases and particles can lead to a warming or cooling of the climate system. Since the start of the industrial era (about 1750), the overall effect of human activities on climate has been a warming influence. The human impact on climate during this era greatly exceeds that due to known changes in natural processes, such as solar changes and volcanic eruptions.


Greenhouse Gases

Once again, adapting the facts to the conclusion. the stem engine as re-invented by james Watt is what allowed the advent of the industrial Revolution which didn't really gather steam, pun intended, until several years later.

The future cannot cause the past.

Steam Engine History

Most notable was Watt's 1769 patent for a separate condenser connected to a cylinder by a valve. Unlike Newcomen's engine, Watt's design had a condenser that could be cool while the cylinder was hot. Watt's engine soon became the dominant design for all modern steam engines and helped bring about the Industrial Revolution.

 

[saveliberty]

You still wouldn't know the first thing about the 'hockey stick' if it was up your dumb ass, you clueless retard.

Apparently worth repeating - from post #2 of this thread.
"Looking at every consecutive twelve month period on record and comparing it every other 12 month period on record, the very recent period from June 2009 to May 2010 was, in fact, the warmest 'year' on record since widespread record keeping began in the late 1800's. The first half of 2010 was so hot that only the beginning of a new La Nina period in mid 2010 kept the year from being the hottest year on record by a large margin rather than just ending up being tied with 2005 as the formal 'hottest year on record'."

Though I doubt 2011 was even the ninth warmest, it still flies in the face of CO2 Faither claims we are influencing an atomospheric warm up. Please, it will amuse me to hear your explanation of how we are in a period of consecutive warming periods.

Your comments are so stupid and clueless, they're totally meaningless.

Avoided the question I see.

 

[RollingThunder]

Then show me a single peer reviewed paper made by the AGW supporters in the 20 years before this one, where natural variability was even mentioned much less acknowledged, as a possible source of the warming trend of the 80's and 90's.

FAQ 2.1 - AR4 WGI Chapter 2: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing

How do Human Activities Contribute to Climate Change and How do They Compare with Natural Influences?

Human activities contribute to climate change by causing changes in Earth’s atmosphere in the amounts of greenhouse gases, aerosols (small particles), and cloudiness. The largest known contribution comes from the burning of fossil fuels, which releases carbon dioxide gas to the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases and aerosols affect climate by altering incoming solar radiation and out- going infrared (thermal) radiation that are part of Earth’s energy balance. Changing the atmospheric abundance or properties of these gases and particles can lead to a warming or cooling of the climate system. Since the start of the industrial era (about 1750), the overall effect of human activities on climate has been a warming influence. The human impact on climate during this era greatly exceeds that due to known changes in natural processes, such as solar changes and volcanic eruptions.

Greenhouse Gases

Once again, adapting the facts to the conclusion. the stem engine as re-invented by james Watt is what allowed the advent of the industrial Revolution which didn't really gather steam, pun intended, until several years later.

The future cannot cause the past.

Steam Engine History

Most notable was Watt's 1769 patent for a separate condenser connected to a cylinder by a valve. Unlike Newcomen's engine, Watt's design had a condenser that could be cool while the cylinder was hot. Watt's engine soon became the dominant design for all modern steam engines and helped bring about the Industrial Revolution.

Ah, code4stupid, here you are, once again, clueless, confused and ignorant. What is it about you retards that makes you want to share your ignorance and misinformation with everybody else? So foolishly sure that you're right and the experts are all wrong. LOL. So ignorant of history but so moronically sure that you and only you know that the steam engine just must have been only thing in the world driving the increased use of coal in the 18th century. LOL. Your are such a hoot, little retard.

Industrial Revolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Industrial Revolution was a period from 1750 to 1850 where changes in agriculture, manufacturing, mining, transportation, and technology had a profound effect on the social, economic and cultural conditions of the times. It began in the United Kingdom, then subsequently spread throughout Western Europe, North America, Japan, and eventually the rest of the world.

 

[saveliberty]

Ah, code4stupid, here you are, once again, clueless, confused and ignorant. What is it about you retards that makes you want to share your ignorance and misinformation with everybody else? So foolishly sure that you're right and the experts are all wrong. LOL. So ignorant of history but so moronically sure that you and only know that the steam engine was the only thing in the world driving the increased use of coal in the 18th century. LOL. Your are such a hoot, little retard.

Industrial Revolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Industrial Revolution was a period from 1750 to 1850 where changes in agriculture, manufacturing, mining, transportation, and technology had a profound effect on the social, economic and cultural conditions of the times. It began in the United Kingdom, then subsequently spread throughout Western Europe, North America, Japan, and eventually the rest of the world.

The use of internal combustion engines was the major contributor to CO2 releases for manufacturing, mining, transportation and technology. Another RT fail.

 

[westwall]

\
solar variability global warming - Google Scholar

Top hit.

Ummmm, I said from one of your AGW supporters. Did I not? There are plenty of papers attributing warming to natural cycles from sceptics and unafiliated scientists. How about from the warmist side?

Did you read the fucking abstract?

In particular, the Sun cannot have contributed more than 30% to the steep temperature
increase that has taken place since then,

What is the "warmist" side exactly?

You're not good on reading comprehension are you.

 

[Big Fitz]

I see the chicken littles have their history shoehorns and are desperately trying to fit it into their faith.

KommieKonnie's lame 'threadkilling' attempt at insult in

3...2...1...

 

[Old Rocks]

Hmm..... So the normal GHGs have no effect? CO2 does nothing?

So you finally get it. CO2 does nothing because it has no mechanism by which do do anything that might result in warming. It absorbs and disperses IR radiated from the earth. If anything, the dispersion is a cooling mechanism, not a warming one.

Real scientists of world wide reputation state otherwise.

http://mls.jpl.nasa.gov/library/Minschwaner_1998.pdf

But of course we should just put our faith in some unknown internet message board poster.

 

[Old Rocks]

I see the chicken littles have their history shoehorns and are desperately trying to fit it into their faith.

KommieKonnie's lame 'threadkilling' attempt at insult in

3...2...1...

I see Fritzy is still practising brainless yap-yap.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ummmm, I said from one of your AGW supporters. Did I not? There are plenty of papers attributing warming to natural cycles from sceptics and unafiliated scientists. How about from the warmist side?

Did you read the fucking abstract?

In particular, the Sun cannot have contributed more than 30% to the steep temperature
increase that has taken place since then,

What is the "warmist" side exactly?

You're not good on reading comprehension are you.

LOL. So post something from a real scientific journal that states otherwise.

 

[Old Rocks]

Walleyes, you threw out the challenge, and it was immediatly answered with two such articles as you claimed did not exist. Not only that, Ooh Pahs had numerous other articles listed. The ball is in your court. Some article that made a real scientific journal, like Science, Nature, or even Geology.

 

[saveliberty]

The Earth cooled in 2011. CO2 gas does not explain that.

 

[RollingThunder]

The Earth cooled in 2011. CO2 gas does not explain that.

LOLOLOL....yeah, it "cooled"....a tiny bit relative to some other very recent years that were a bit hotter....but 2011 was still 'hotter' than about 150 of the last 160 years that they've kept temperature records. Only desperate denier cultists would be silly enough to call that "cooling".

Moreover, "CO2 gas does not" have to "explain that" slight dip in temperatures this last year. It is only you duped denier cultists who fantasize that climate scientists don't take into account all of the other factors that influence the Earth's climate, like the recent solar minimum and the strong La Ninas that brought colder water to the surface of the Pacific. As the sun moves towards a new solar maximum and an El Nino inevitably cycles through in the next few years, the still continuing anthropogenic global warming that has been slightly masked since mid-2010 will combine with those factors I just mentioned and cause the world to see some new record world average temperatures.

 

[westwall]

The Earth cooled in 2011. CO2 gas does not explain that.

LOLOLOL....yeah, it "cooled"....a tiny bit relative to some other very recent years that were a bit hotter....but 2011 was still 'hotter' than about 150 of the last 160 years that they've kept temperature records. Only desperate denier cultists would be silly enough to call that "cooling".

Moreover, "CO2 gas does not" have to "explain that" slight dip in temperatures this last year. It is only you duped denier cultists who fantasize that climate scientists don't take into account all of the other factors that influence the Earth's climate, like the recent solar minimum and the strong La Ninas that brought colder water to the surface of the Pacific. As the sun moves towards a new solar maximum and an El Nino inevitably cycles through in the next few years, the still continuing anthropogenic global warming that has been slightly masked since mid-2010 will combine with those factors I just mentioned and cause the world to see some new record world average temperatures.

Warmer only because Hansen has been falsifying the historical temperature record, which a denial cult retard like you should figure out. You're just too dumb to do so.

 

[RollingThunder]

The Earth cooled in 2011. CO2 gas does not explain that.

LOLOLOL....yeah, it "cooled"....a tiny bit relative to some other very recent years that were a bit hotter....but 2011 was still 'hotter' than about 150 of the last 160 years that they've kept temperature records. Only desperate denier cultists would be silly enough to call that "cooling".

Moreover, "CO2 gas does not" have to "explain that" slight dip in temperatures this last year. It is only you duped denier cultists who fantasize that climate scientists don't take into account all of the other factors that influence the Earth's climate, like the recent solar minimum and the strong La Ninas that brought colder water to the surface of the Pacific. As the sun moves towards a new solar maximum and an El Nino inevitably cycles through in the next few years, the still continuing anthropogenic global warming that has been slightly masked since mid-2010 will combine with those factors I just mentioned and cause the world to see some new record world average temperatures.

Warmer only because Hansen has been falsifying the historical temperature record, which a denial cult retard like you should figure out. You're just too dumb to do so.

Oh walleyed, your idiotic, evidence-free conspiracy theories are just further confirmation of your tinfoil-hat wearing proclivities, general derangement and continuing mental breakdown. I suppose you also think "Hansen" is running around the Arctic with a hair dryer melting all those gigatons of ice just to fool us all. LOLOLOLOL.....you are such a retard...

 

[IanC]

westwall- I think you are being very unfair to Hansen!

he is not the only one who has been jiggering the figures. Hansen was only going along with the others because of peer pressure.

Phil Jones was the ringleader. once everybody else found out that you could get away with anything, and if asked you just say the dog ate my homework, then it was easy to put up any figures that were favourable with the task of producing more grant money.

 

[IanC]

LOLOLOL....yeah, it "cooled"....a tiny bit relative to some other very recent years that were a bit hotter....but 2011 was still 'hotter' than about 150 of the last 160 years that they've kept temperature records. Only desperate denier cultists would be silly enough to call that "cooling".

Moreover, "CO2 gas does not" have to "explain that" slight dip in temperatures this last year. It is only you duped denier cultists who fantasize that climate scientists don't take into account all of the other factors that influence the Earth's climate, like the recent solar minimum and the strong La Ninas that brought colder water to the surface of the Pacific. As the sun moves towards a new solar maximum and an El Nino inevitably cycles through in the next few years, the still continuing anthropogenic global warming that has been slightly masked since mid-2010 will combine with those factors I just mentioned and cause the world to see some new record world average temperatures.

Warmer only because Hansen has been falsifying the historical temperature record, which a denial cult retard like you should figure out. You're just too dumb to do so.

Oh walleyed, your idiotic, evidence-free conspiracy theories are just further confirmation of your tinfoil-hat wearing proclivities, general derangement and continuing mental breakdown. I suppose you also think "Hansen" is running around the Arctic with a hair dryer melting all those gigatons of ice just to fool us all. LOLOLOLOL.....you are such a retard...

rt- I understand being loyal to an idea, a piece of your worldview, something that you measured the evidence for and came down on one side to the exclusion of the other side. unfortunately for many people that decision was made 10, 15, 20 years ago when the case for global warming due to CO2 appeared much stronger than today.

but what are the pillars of evidence that convinced you? are they still legitimate today?

warming- yes, but the figures are in some doubt because of all the adjustments made in arbitrary fashion, mostly away from prying eyes. but there has still been some warming. would it matter to you if it was 0.5, 0.75 or 1.0C over the last 100 years?

CO2- yes there is a mechanism that leads to warming when CO2 concentration in the atmosphere increases. 1.0-1.2C per doubling. is that small amount the cause of your dismay?

those two things are agreed upon by most people but they certainly dont lead to catastrophe.

things meant to scare us-
temperatures warmest ever via the Hockey Stick graph. the methodology and conclusions are bogus. anyone who has actually looked at the criticisms wouldnt touch it with a ten foot pole.

glacier and ice cap melt, they have been melting for a long time, since the LIA. when it is warm they melt and when it is cold they reform. havent you read the old newspaper articles lamenting the loss of glaciers....from the 1920's and before?

sea level rise, it has been pretty constant since we started measuring it, and its still pretty constant. unfortunately predictions of doom make the media headlines and reasonable accounts of business as usual dont. the same seems to go for science journals, which print exaggerated conclusions from very weak evidence.

habitat change, flora and fauna extinctions, weather weirding, etc. conditions have always changed, thats why we have the theory of evolution. weather is always bad for some, somewhere on the planet but it is only in this age of instant news that we know about it. hurricanes and cyclones are down but you wouldnt know it by listening to clowns like Al Gore.



the scary part of this whole thing to me is the tremendous hit to the respectability of science that CAGW has caused. climate science has burned off the banked authority of scientific endeavour by twisting and distorting cherry picked data and then using science societies and their figureheads to politicize the arguments.

I can understand how you came to believe in CAGW. what I cant understand is how you hold on to the fervent belief now that it is crumbling down on your head.