Climate is Weather

[jc456]

Climate is not weather because the former covers a longer period than the latter.

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

The fact that one, "weather" produces "climate" shows that they are separate.

Kind of like a car being produced from steel?

climate is weather

Look out your window, the weather you see is the climate.

Still just as wrong. What you see out the window is your weather. Your climate is what you live in -- regardless what you see out your window. It may match at that moment, or it may not. Right now out mine --- it doesn't. And that means the weather is abnormal. Climate is the standard that determines what "normal" is. Only if that weather stays abnormal -- over a considerably long period --- may we posit that "the climate has changed".

What's outside at this moment doesn't make that case. And it never will. Period.

that's just whooie. You're posting garbage. Thanks, I always wondered what message board trash was.

 

[Pogo]

Climate is not weather because the former covers a longer period than the latter.

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

The fact that one, "weather" produces "climate" shows that they are separate.

Kind of like a car being produced from steel?

climate is weather

Look out your window, the weather you see is the climate.

Still just as wrong. What you see out the window is your weather. Your climate is what you live in -- regardless what you see out your window. It may match at that moment, or it may not. Right now out mine --- it doesn't. And that means the weather is abnormal. Climate is the standard that determines what "normal" is. Only if that weather stays abnormal -- over a considerably long period --- may we posit that "the climate has changed".

What's outside at this moment doesn't make that case. And it never will. Period.

that's just whooie. You're posting garbage. Thanks, I always wondered what message board trash was.

Well then you're doing a fine job for a beginner. It's like you have experience.

Btw there is no W in "hooey".

 

[haissem123]

can't any scientist just simulate the earth and show what co would do to it? I mean it can't be that hard to get the gist. why would anyone want to pump co into their atmosphere on massive scales not to mention the poison in the emmissions? what idiots would want this? only those making money off oil and gas. unless they want to sell clean water and air in future. gas mask sales men in china are making a killing I hear. why don't you aholes move to their cities and let me know how that works out for you.

 

[Pogo]

can't any scientist just simulate the earth and show what co would do to it? I mean it can't be that hard to get the gist. why would anyone want to pump co into their atmosphere on massive scales not to mention the poison in the emmissions? what idiots would want this? only those making money off oil and gas. unless they want to sell clean water and air in future. gas mask sales men in china are making a killing I hear. why don't you aholes move to their cities and let me know how that works out for you.

Considering that if the entirety of time were compressed into one day, the entirety of human existence would comprise less than one second, no we'll prolly never have the perspective to assess such trends. But that also means we don't have the perspective to assess the negative of those predictions either. Which means it fails to produce an excuse to keep polluting. In other words it's like saying, "they tell me leaving food out in the open will attract rats, but I'm looking at it right now and I don't see any rats, so I'm gonna keep tossing food on the floor". Same kind of logic.

 

[elektra]

Climate is not weather because the former covers a longer period than the latter.

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

The fact that one, "weather" produces "climate" shows that they are separate.

Kind of like a car being produced from steel?

climate is weather

Look out your window, the weather you see is the climate.

Still just as wrong. What you see out the window is your weather. Your climate is what you live in -- regardless what you see out your window. It may match at that moment, or it may not. Right now out mine --- it doesn't. And that means the weather is abnormal. Climate is the standard that determines what "normal" is. Only if that weather stays abnormal -- over a considerably long period --- may we posit that "the climate has changed".

What's outside at this moment doesn't make that case. And it never will. Period.

What I live in? Like the climate outside, which is the weather. Climate is a standard? Like determined by dictators?

Today's climate is pretty cold here in Pennsylvania, as its been in the past, tomorrow may be warm, as its been in the past, either way, today's climate is cold.

Climate is a standard? That is hilarious, as in laughing at how stupid you sound.

 

[elektra]

Climate is not weather because the former covers a longer period than the latter.

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

Did you read what you wrote? Because, what you wrote indicates they must be one in the same. the only difference is TIME.

View attachment 37427

Their is also the areal extent. Climate is regional at its smallest scale and more accurately taken holistically; globally. Weather can span areas of less than a few square kilometers.

Climate is regional, no such thing as MICRO-CLIMATES, as dictated by weather.

I knew you would post something stupid, Crock.

 

[Pogo]

Climate is not weather because the former covers a longer period than the latter.

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

The fact that one, "weather" produces "climate" shows that they are separate.

Kind of like a car being produced from steel?

climate is weather

Look out your window, the weather you see is the climate.

Still just as wrong. What you see out the window is your weather. Your climate is what you live in -- regardless what you see out your window. It may match at that moment, or it may not. Right now out mine --- it doesn't. And that means the weather is abnormal. Climate is the standard that determines what "normal" is. Only if that weather stays abnormal -- over a considerably long period --- may we posit that "the climate has changed".

What's outside at this moment doesn't make that case. And it never will. Period.

What I live in? Like the climate outside, which is the weather. Climate is a standard? Like determined by dictators?

Today's climate is pretty cold here in Pennsylvania, as its been in the past, tomorrow may be warm, as its been in the past, either way, today's climate is cold.

Climate is a standard? That is hilarious, as in laughing at how stupid you sound.

No, your climate isn't "cold" -- your weather is cold. Your climate is "temperate" -- or "tropical" or "arctic". None of those tell you what your weather is right now. It can't. Because that's not what climate is. Climate is what kind of world you live in; weather is what that world is doing right now.

You can hurl your childish barbs until the teacher comes back to the classroom but you're not about to dumb me down to the level you want to take a simple definition everybody else already knows. Grow up already.

 

[jc456]

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

The fact that one, "weather" produces "climate" shows that they are separate.

Kind of like a car being produced from steel?

climate is weather

Look out your window, the weather you see is the climate.

Still just as wrong. What you see out the window is your weather. Your climate is what you live in -- regardless what you see out your window. It may match at that moment, or it may not. Right now out mine --- it doesn't. And that means the weather is abnormal. Climate is the standard that determines what "normal" is. Only if that weather stays abnormal -- over a considerably long period --- may we posit that "the climate has changed".

What's outside at this moment doesn't make that case. And it never will. Period.

that's just whooie. You're posting garbage. Thanks, I always wondered what message board trash was.

Well then you're doing a fine job for a beginner. It's like you have experience.

Btw there is no W in "hooey".[/QUOT
hmmmmmmmmm

 

[Billy_Bob]

can't any scientist just simulate the earth and show what co would do to it? I mean it can't be that hard to get the gist. why would anyone want to pump co into their atmosphere on massive scales not to mention the poison in the emmissions? what idiots would want this? only those making money off oil and gas. unless they want to sell clean water and air in future. gas mask sales men in china are making a killing I hear. why don't you aholes move to their cities and let me know how that works out for you.

They cant.. Empirical evidence shows that all warming in the last 155 years is natural variation. This means that not even one onehundreth of a degree of temperature rise can be attributed to CO2.. The earths systems have shown the theroy a failure and incorrect.

I find it funny that I have posted the data and the Null hypothesis killing the CAGW bull shit 9 times in its entirety on this board and Crick, Old Crock, along with many others ignore it and fail to answer why.

 

[jc456]

can't any scientist just simulate the earth and show what co would do to it? I mean it can't be that hard to get the gist. why would anyone want to pump co into their atmosphere on massive scales not to mention the poison in the emmissions? what idiots would want this? only those making money off oil and gas. unless they want to sell clean water and air in future. gas mask sales men in china are making a killing I hear. why don't you aholes move to their cities and let me know how that works out for you.

They cant.. Empirical evidence shows that all warming in the last 155 years is natural variation. This means that not even one onehundreth of a degree of temperature rise can be attributed to CO2.. The earths systems have shown the theroy a failure and incorrect.

I find it funny that I have posted the data and the Null hypothesis killing the CAGW bull shit 9 times in its entirety on this board and Crick, Old Crock, along with many others ignore it and fail to answer why.

Because they have no experiment that confirms their story. So lying is all they can do.

 

[haissem123]

Climate is not weather because the former covers a longer period than the latter.

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

The fact that one, "weather" produces "climate" shows that they are separate.

Kind of like a car being produced from steel?

climate is weather

Look out your window, the weather you see is the climate.

Still just as wrong. What you see out the window is your weather. Your climate is what you live in -- regardless what you see out your window. It may match at that moment, or it may not. Right now out mine --- it doesn't. And that means the weather is abnormal. Climate is the standard that determines what "normal" is. Only if that weather stays abnormal -- over a considerably long period --- may we posit that "the climate has changed".

What's outside at this moment doesn't make that case. And it never will. Period.

What I live in? Like the climate outside, which is the weather. Climate is a standard? Like determined by dictators?

Today's climate is pretty cold here in Pennsylvania, as its been in the past, tomorrow may be warm, as its been in the past, either way, today's climate is cold.

Climate is a standard? That is hilarious, as in laughing at how stupid you sound.

I knew you had your filthy paws in the gas or oil business. now i see you are a pennsy moron that sold their own water table and air so a few could get rich off the poisoning of us all. lol. what a bunch of stupid greedy hicks out there.

 

[haissem123]

can't any scientist just simulate the earth and show what co would do to it? I mean it can't be that hard to get the gist. why would anyone want to pump co into their atmosphere on massive scales not to mention the poison in the emmissions? what idiots would want this? only those making money off oil and gas. unless they want to sell clean water and air in future. gas mask sales men in china are making a killing I hear. why don't you aholes move to their cities and let me know how that works out for you.

They cant.. Empirical evidence shows that all warming in the last 155 years is natural variation. This means that not even one onehundreth of a degree of temperature rise can be attributed to CO2.. The earths systems have shown the theroy a failure and incorrect.

I find it funny that I have posted the data and the Null hypothesis killing the CAGW bull shit 9 times in its entirety on this board and Crick, Old Crock, along with many others ignore it and fail to answer why.

i really don't even humor your opinions any more. Because i know I can't fix stupid.

 

[haissem123]

can't any scientist just simulate the earth and show what co would do to it? I mean it can't be that hard to get the gist. why would anyone want to pump co into their atmosphere on massive scales not to mention the poison in the emmissions? what idiots would want this? only those making money off oil and gas. unless they want to sell clean water and air in future. gas mask sales men in china are making a killing I hear. why don't you aholes move to their cities and let me know how that works out for you.

They cant.. Empirical evidence shows that all warming in the last 155 years is natural variation. This means that not even one onehundreth of a degree of temperature rise can be attributed to CO2.. The earths systems have shown the theroy a failure and incorrect.

I find it funny that I have posted the data and the Null hypothesis killing the CAGW bull shit 9 times in its entirety on this board and Crick, Old Crock, along with many others ignore it and fail to answer why.

Because they have no experiment that confirms their story. So lying is all they can do.

yeah, there is nothing unusual about today's weather and it's massive sudden change globally. lol. it's all a conspiracy and myth. All the scientist that oil didn't buy. ie. 95 percent, say it's real but they don't know anything. what grade did any denier pass and did they ever even take science at all? seems not

 

[Billy_Bob]

can't any scientist just simulate the earth and show what co would do to it? I mean it can't be that hard to get the gist. why would anyone want to pump co into their atmosphere on massive scales not to mention the poison in the emmissions? what idiots would want this? only those making money off oil and gas. unless they want to sell clean water and air in future. gas mask sales men in china are making a killing I hear. why don't you aholes move to their cities and let me know how that works out for you.

They cant.. Empirical evidence shows that all warming in the last 155 years is natural variation. This means that not even one onehundreth of a degree of temperature rise can be attributed to CO2.. The earths systems have shown the theroy a failure and incorrect.

I find it funny that I have posted the data and the Null hypothesis killing the CAGW bull shit 9 times in its entirety on this board and Crick, Old Crock, along with many others ignore it and fail to answer why.

Because they have no experiment that confirms their story. So lying is all they can do.

yeah, there is nothing unusual about today's weather and it's massive sudden change globally. lol. it's all a conspiracy and myth. All the scientist that oil didn't buy. ie. 95 percent, say it's real but they don't know anything. what grade did any denier pass and did they ever even take science at all? seems not

I understand that we real scientists can not fix the stupid you employ and choose to believe. Just like your 95% (or did you mean 97% consensus) which has been shown a fabricated lie by Legates Et. Al.. But continue with your mindless drone rant.. Its entertaining..

 

[Billy_Bob]

but weather is what produces climate. So you can't really separate them like you and others always wish to do. they go together. BTW, climate is what produces weather. It's circular.

The fact that one "produces" the other shows that they are separate.

The fact that one, "weather" produces "climate" shows that they are separate.

Kind of like a car being produced from steel?

climate is weather

Look out your window, the weather you see is the climate.

Still just as wrong. What you see out the window is your weather. Your climate is what you live in -- regardless what you see out your window. It may match at that moment, or it may not. Right now out mine --- it doesn't. And that means the weather is abnormal. Climate is the standard that determines what "normal" is. Only if that weather stays abnormal -- over a considerably long period --- may we posit that "the climate has changed".

What's outside at this moment doesn't make that case. And it never will. Period.

What I live in? Like the climate outside, which is the weather. Climate is a standard? Like determined by dictators?

Today's climate is pretty cold here in Pennsylvania, as its been in the past, tomorrow may be warm, as its been in the past, either way, today's climate is cold.

Climate is a standard? That is hilarious, as in laughing at how stupid you sound.

I knew you had your filthy paws in the gas or oil business. now i see you are a pennsy moron that sold their own water table and air so a few could get rich off the poisoning of us all. lol. what a bunch of stupid greedy hicks out there.

The mindless drone squawk of "dirty Oil and Gas" is a sure sign of a clueless hack lib moron.. Did you get your script from Old Crock or Crick?

 

[haissem123]

if you are a scientist, why do you suppose we haven't come up with a better engine then the combustion which is like shitting up. you are not a scientist at least a good one. that is obvious. no scientist would deny the pollution of out air and water is a good or smart thing. fn moron

 

[Billy_Bob]

if you are a scientist, why do you suppose we haven't come up with a better engine then the combustion which is like shitting up. you are not a scientist at least a good one. that is obvious. no scientist would deny the pollution of out air and water is a good or smart thing. fn moron

The US is the world leader in clean outputs.. Your a fucking moron and a left wing hack.. Are you going to continue to recite the left wing activist talking points devoid of any facts the rest of the day too?

 

[haissem123]

if you are a scientist, why do you suppose we haven't come up with a better engine then the combustion which is like shitting up. you are not a scientist at least a good one. that is obvious. no scientist would deny the pollution of out air and water is a good or smart thing. fn moron

The US is the world leader in clean outputs.. Your a fucking moron and a left wing hack.. Are you going to continue to recite the left wing activist talking points devoid of any facts the rest of the day too?

u.s. is the biggest polluter, didn't you hear the facts? or did indian and china following our stupidity race past us?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

For the record:

"Climate" and "weather" are NOT synonyms.

 

[Billy_Bob]

u.s. is the biggest polluter, didn't you hear the facts? or did indian and china following our stupidity race past us?