Climate Distortion

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Quantum Windbag, Aug 9, 2012.

  1. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    I am sure the usual idiots are going to pop in here and accuse me of saying something else, but there are some facts we need to get straight.


    1. The climate is changing.
    2. Humans are having an impact on that change.
    3. Hanson is going to destroy all credibility if people think he is representative of the science.

    Cliff Mass Weather Blog: Climate Distortion
     
  2. flacaltenn
    Online

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,180
    Thanks Received:
    4,677
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,444
    Why can't these clowns just FORECAST doom for next Thurs? Why does it have to be the start of the end of the world today?
     
  3. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    24,270
    Thanks Received:
    2,921
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +6,259
    [​IMG]



    These climate k00ks............they are losing in such epic fashion its beyond words frankly. And its an amazing story..........for all the years of bomb throwing, in the last 3-4 years, they are actually going backwards. Its become like the talk of the nutty-ass uncle that nobody wants at the party. Those hard core environmentalist radicals are viewed as total mental cases by the majority of the American people, much like the 9/11 Truthers. People hear these people and if they have even half a brain they are saying to themselves, "Oh shit........one of these nuts!!"


    Yet they call the denier folks "retards"!!!:2up:
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2012
  4. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,612
    Thanks Received:
    5,429
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,413
    OK. You have a blog for your science, the rest of us have a PNAS publication. As well as peer reviewed articles like those from this source;

    AGW Observer
     
  5. flacaltenn
    Online

    flacaltenn USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    30,180
    Thanks Received:
    4,677
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +13,444
    At least we agree to 2 out of 3....
     
  6. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    Peer review is a joke.
     
  7. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    You obviously did not read the blog. The person who wrote it is a meteorologist in the Pacific Northwest and insists that anthropomorphic driven climate change is a fact. The fact that you are willing to reject him simply because he doesn't agree with Hanson proves how much you care about science.
     
  8. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    At least you are 66% right.
     
  9. RollingThunder
    Offline

    RollingThunder VIP Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,398
    Thanks Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +886
    I read the "blog" and the dude's analysis is full of holes. He is a meteorologist, not a published climate scientist. Here's his main mistake.

    "Let me prove to you now that Dr. Hansen's claims are deceptive. Consider the heat wave in Texas/Oklahoma last year. Below you will find the mean temperatures for July and August over the U.S. (top panels), while below are the differences (anomalies) from normal (or climatology). The anomalies were over 8F in July and over 7F in August.

    How big could the global warming signal be? And particularly the warming due to mankind's emission of greenhouse gases? The IPCC is the world scientific body that has examined such questions. They note that human influence should have become significant somewhere in the mid-70s and the generally accepted estimated of the warming of the Northern Hemisphere since then is roughly 1F or C

    So I think you can see that the global warming signal due to human-emitted gases could not possibly be more than 1F, and is probably much less. Yet the heat wave last summer, expressed as monthly anomalies, reached 7-8F over large portions of Texas and Oklahoma. What can you conclude? Something other than global warming produced the lion's share of the heat wave..."


    He seems to want to assume that extra heat due to anthropogenic global warming is somehow being passed into the environment equally everywhere but that is very clearly not the case. The Arctic region is warming much faster than the rest of the world. The heat added by AGW is causing climate instabilities and more extreme local weather, in some places more than others. Taking the average temperature rise for the whole planet, which Mass claims, rather bizarrely, is "roughly 1F or C" ('C' is not the same as 'F') and making the assumption that any temperature increases in some particular locality that are over one degree must be due only to natural causes is idiotic and fraudulent.

    It's a blog!!! HIS blog!!! Let's see him get his dissenting opinions published in a valid and respected peer-reviewed science journal and maybe they will get some consideration in the climate science community. Scientific debate and dispute takes place and gets resolved in the science journals, not on some weatherman's blog.
     
  10. Old Rocks
    Online

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,612
    Thanks Received:
    5,429
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,413
    But that is the problem with all too many of the people here. They cannot differantiate between the validity of a blog or an obese junkie on the radio and what is published in peer reviewed journals. Not just in this nation but all over the world.

    I really didn't realize that there were this many people that lived in some alternative reality in the stunted minds in this nation. Sad.
     

Share This Page