Discussion in 'Environment' started by Billy_Bob, Aug 18, 2018.
Say's the moron who thinks Hotwhopper and SkepticalShitScience are credible sources...
And then they show no proof.... All while showing Natural Variation and cycles not connected to AGW are in fact the cause...
You see what you want to see and fail to use cognitive thought...
YOU post a paper that says exactly the OPPOSITE of what you contend, then criticize them of no proof when they point out that simple and well demonstrated FACT? What a fucking idiot you are.
The climategate emails absolutely destroy your idiotic rants, jackass.
We’ll add that to famines from overpopulation, Hetrosexual HIV epidemic, boob implants slaughtering women, upcoming ice/heat/whatever age and the other dozen predicted catastrophes that never came true.
You’re batting 1.000
Say's the moron who thinks Hotwhopper and SkepticalShitScience are credible sources
Matter not to him that John Cook used Lubos Motl, the name of the prominent physicist to log on and praise John Cook posts. Then after he got caught he "explained" that he was doing this for "use of a psychology experiment".
Lets see him try that again today after facebook & Twitter finally started to give people like that the boot.
You're lying. You probably don't know it, because you're an authoritarian follower who just parrots what he's told. All the dictators in history have loved Useful Idiots like you.
Why didn't you mention that the discussion only occurred in a private forum, and never saw any public exposure, until denier fascists swiped the data? Did your cult not mention that? Cook played a little injoke in a private discussion. Your side swiped data. Your side looks corrupt, and you look corrupt for supporting them.
The violently psychopathic Motl also started screaming that Cook should be killed. I won't ask you to condemn that, because we all know you don't have the guts or integrity to go against your cult, and because everyone knows how the thought of violence gives you a tingle up the leg. That's how you authoritarian-followers roll.
Meanwhile, while you all get ever more violent and unhinged, we'll all just keep kicking your weepy butts with hard data, like we've always done. Run back to your cult and ask them how to respond to that.
I see that you and Old Rocks LIED like hell since WUWT posted the entire Abstract with the part YOU are squealing about in it:
"May suggest coral populations are reaching an upper threshold, a "tipping point" beyond which coral survival is uncertain."
What you two completely left out is this, ALSO FROM THE SAME PAPER,
Figure 4. Massive Porites spp. bleaching frequency and prevalence. NOAA extended sea surface temperature (SST) for Great Barrier Reef (GBR) (A) from ship and buoy data (1854–2000, 11 yr moving average, red line) (Smith et al., 2008). Southern hemisphere surface temperature anomaly (ocean and land) reconstruction (Mann et al., 2008) (solid line) with the uncertainty (0.23°C) on the reconstruction indicated (the reconstruction includes coral extension rates so is not fully independent of our reconstruction). Dashed line indicates mean temperature over record length (1570–1995). Bleaching frequency (B) (number of years per decadal bin in which bleaching occurred) and prevalence (C) (% of corals bleached per decade) observed in at least 20% of coral for the GBR denoted by blue bars. Red color bars indicate years in which less than 2 (frequency)/3 (prevalence) coral cores were available; those years were excluded from further analysis (see Supplementary Material). Number of coral cores available in each decade indicated by solid black line. Dashed black line indicates breakpoint determined linear trend in bleaching and horizontal solid black lines represent breakpoint location 95%CI. For (B) decade notation marks the start of the bin for frequency and each coral core (n = 44) contributed up to 10 annual growth extensions per decadal bin."
This stated possibility doesn't make sense anyway since the TIME FRAME of the paper mostly occurs during the LIA, when the waters were cooler:
" but reconstructed increases in bleaching frequency and prevalence, may suggest coral populations are reaching an upper bleaching threshold, a “tipping point” beyond which coral survival is uncertain."
Not only that they don' show what it was like during the MWP, Roman Warming, Minoan Warming or the warmest of all Holocene Optimism, when the world was at its warmest by at least 2 degrees F higher than now.
Corals have been around for at least 100 million years, most of the time the planet was MUCH warmer than now.
They choose to ignore real science and cognitive thought process.. Unfortunately there is no hope for people with this affliction. Until they are lambasted with facts, which are undeniable and they have no way out, they will continue to believe... Even then many will not change their belief in the made up crap..
And they lied about that abstract, in the WUWT headine and in the text.
And you're fine with such lying. You always are. Look at you here, running cover for it.
That's one reason why it's so good to be on the rational and moral side. We don't have anyone commanding us to lie and defend lies, hence we never end up looking stupid and corrupt.
Separate names with a comma.