Geologists On Global Climate Change

[mamooth]

The hot spot is there. The longwave is dropping. Remember, you lying about the science doesn't make the science wrong. It just makes you a raging cult liar.

This is usually where you prove your dishonesty by posting a sourceless confusing mystery graph, followed by your refusal to tell your source, even when directly asked. If you'd like, we can go another round with that.

It clearly enrages you that every prediction of AGW theory has been proven, while every prediction of your denier pseuoscience has failed. The data says you're an open fraud, so you try fabricating more data, and you get caught and revealed as a fraud yet again, and down you go in the denier death spiral.

 

[SSDD]

The hot spot is there. The longwave is dropping. Remember, you lying about the science doesn't make the science wrong. It just makes you a raging cult liar.

Sorry hairball....the hot spot is missing and always has been...a million radiosondes say so and I know that you hate that the LW at the TOA is increasing, but alas, it is....even your bud crick can acknowledge that...fact is fact.

As to the charts, its all lies with you all the time isn't it. I gave you a NOAA chart that stated exactly what the KNMI chart said....but here it is again.

The only one enraged is you, because your hypothesis is failing at every turn and nature simply refuses to cooperate with the hoax....your anger and bitterness is clearly expressed in every word you post. Sucks to be you...

 

[Billy_Bob]

And once again I'll ask for an answer to a simple question: Where is the evidence to support the claims that climate scientists all around the world are involved in a conspiracy with governments to suppress to truth about global climate change? Asked many times, not answered once.

And once again, conspiracy is your argument...it is a fraudulent argument as are most warmer arguments, but if it is all you have, it is all you have. There is no conspiracy, there is the natural tendency of big government types to increase the size of government....now perhaps, you can say which of those promoting AGW, and all of the government control required to bring it under control are not big government types....or receive their funding from big government types....or perhaps, you could tuck your "conspiracy" argument into a nice tight wad and shove it up your ass where your head apparently resides.

Your question has been answered...just because you don't like the answer does not negate the fact that it has been answered.

Wrong again, the conspiracy of scientists and governments is the foundation of the deniers argument. You don't even know what you stand for, what you believe, or why.

Sorry but it isn't....failure of science to provide any actual empirical evidence that the CO2 produced by mankind is altering the global climate is the foundation of our argument...again, your conspiracy argument is just a straw man.

You don't think scientists who favor big government can use their position to provide information that will be used by those in government to grow government? Of course you don't because clearly, history isn't your thing.

Do you think some "conspiracy" was involved to grow the welfare state and swell the government in the process? Social scientists who favored big government were perfectly willing to provide paper after paper in support of the welfare state and people in government who favored the welfare state and the money and power the growth of the welfare state afforded them were more than willing to use those papers to justify the growth of the welfare state and in turn the growth of government....and fund more papers pronouncing the benefits of the welfare state.

There were plenty of social scientists who were opposed to the growth of the welfare state and plenty of papers published predicting the disaster of the welfare state but like climate skeptics, funding was difficult for them to get and their predictions went mostly unconsidered, and unheeded. So here we are in the 21st century, and we see the predictions of those opposed to the growth of the welfare state were, in fact, correct...and we see that the welfare state was a disaster which cost hundreds of billions of dollars, caused incalculable suffering by creating generational dependence upon government handouts, and actually lifted very few, if any people out of poverty.

The point is that science that supported the growth of government was produced by willing participants who were funded by big government types in order to, in fact, grow government. It didn't involve any conspiracy...it was just the undeniable tendency for those who believe big government is good to do what they can to assure the continued growth of government and to restrict, whenever possible, access to those who may be seen as competition, who don't favor big government.

Poor science that depends almost entirely on failing models is where climate science stands today...just as poor science based almost entirely on poor models was where social science stood back in the day when the welfare state was the brass ring waiting to be grasped by big government types.

You are the one claiming conspiracy....us skeptics are saying bad science and reality is proving us correct at every turn. When the models which are the foundation of climate science are diverging further away from reality every day, who in their right mind continues to support the models?...other than those who see them as a means to continue to grow government?

Some interesting theories in your political diatribe, none of which does anything to substantiate the deniers claims of scientists suppressing the real truth about global climate change.

Get used to it. The deniers here are "one trick ponies"

Two liberal posters, or should I say posers, who truly are one trick phonies... All you two have is ad-hominem attacks, lies, and deceit.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The hot spot is there. The longwave is dropping. Remember, you lying about the science doesn't make the science wrong. It just makes you a raging cult liar.

This is usually where you prove your dishonesty by posting a sourceless confusing mystery graph, followed by your refusal to tell your source, even when directly asked. If you'd like, we can go another round with that.

It clearly enrages you that every prediction of AGW theory has been proven, while every prediction of your denier pseuoscience has failed. The data says you're an open fraud, so you try fabricating more data, and you get caught and revealed as a fraud yet again, and down you go in the denier death spiral.

Prove it Snageltooth.. The Satellite data shows it does not exist. Your fantasy models are the only thing which even remotely implies that it exists..

 

[Billy_Bob]

I love the pee wee herman game you all like to use. You must watch his films often.

Another compelling rebuttal, no doubt based on intensive scientific research.

Considering that yours have never dealt with any sort of real science, them's is pretty big words for and 8 year old.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The ERBE and CERES satellite data sets directly provided total radiation output from the earth since 1984. The measured solar minus measured LW output shows strong deficit that would cause warming. There is about .68 to .85 W/m^2 more energy coming into the earth than leaving. This is what leads almost all scientists on both sides of the controversy to believe that the earth is warming.

It's very simple. The earth is receiving more energy than it's losing. This is determined by direct measurements, and not by some climate model.

That is an incorrect assumption.. We have been losing about -0.65W/M^2 for over two decades. Your calculations refuse to acknowledge much of the convection cycle which shows that the loss might even be two or three times that amount. The race to find more places to hide the missing heat has been going on for 20 years. Places where we have little or no ability to verify the alleged hiding spot.. Deep oceans, Mid troposphere, Stratosphere.. and on and on....

 

[Billy_Bob]

The ERBE and CERES satellite data sets directly provided total radiation output from the earth since 1984. The measured solar minus measured LW output shows strong deficit that would cause warming. There is about .68 to .85 W/m^2 more energy coming into the earth than leaving. This is what leads almost all scientists on both sides of the controversy to believe that the earth is warming.

It's very simple. The earth is receiving more energy than it's losing. This is determined by direct measurements, and not by some climate model.

Outgoing LW at the top of the atmosphere is increasing....contrary to the prediction of the AGW hypothesis...no hot spot = failure of the AGW hypothesis. If one adheres to the the scientific method....a single failed prediction made by a hypothesis should result in the hypothesis being scrapped and a new one formulated...how many failures must warmers have before they realize that the hypothesis is flawed?

It's fun to watch you guys pretend to know something about science.

The ignorant fool Liminal speaks from his totally ignorant position.. His mother and fathers basement, on their computer, and refuses to try and find a job.... Oh wait Clown would suit him well...

 

[IanC]

You misunderstood the point. The ERBE and CERES satellite data are actual measurements that have nothing to do with climate modeling. Those actual measurements show that the earth is receiving more energy than it is emitting. That extra energy can lead to atmosphere temperature increase, or ice melting, or ocean temperature increase, and higher sea levels or some combination.

And you sidestepped the point....the AGW hypothesis says that outgoing LW at the TOA should be dropping...it is increasing and has been for quite some time....that constitutes a failure of the hypothesis....the AGW hypothesis predicts a tropospheric hot spot...it isn't there...another failure of the hypothesis. How many failures of the hypothesis are required before climate science admits that the hypothesis is flawed and goes back to the drawing board?

It is true that IF the longwave at TOA is increasing (without a decrease in shortwave) then the Earth is moving towards a less warming equilibrium, or even cooling.

The hotspot has not been found, except by those who torture the data and replace actual temperature data with wind shear proxy. I believe they called it wind vector in the recent paper because they didn't want the derision of their last paper brought up again.

CO2 theory has failed repeatedly, it is time to redo the hypothesis with more rea

 

[mamooth]

As to the charts, its all lies with you all the time isn't it. I gave you a NOAA chart that stated exactly what the KNMI chart said....but here it is again.

Like I said, posting a mystery graph is a form of lying on your part.

Saying "It came from KNMI" is not a source. Exactly what did somebody plot from KNMI? Show us exactly what buttons to push to reproduce the plot. What was the data source? Was it corrected for satellite drift and similar things, or was it uncorrected raw data? The sinusoidal nature of it makes one immediately suspect it's not been corrected for drift.

If you didn't fake it, that should be easy. But you won't do it. Because you did fake it, and everyone knows it.

 

[mamooth]

The hotspot has not been found, except by those who torture the data and replace actual temperature data with wind shear proxy. I believe they called it wind vector in the recent paper because they didn't want the derision of their last paper brought up again.

Just because another denier sacred cow was slain, burned and the ashes scattered is no reason to invoke yet another conspiracy theory.

Well, from your POV, it probably is.

 

[IanC]

Which sacred cow is that?

 

[Billy_Bob]

The hotspot has not been found, except by those who torture the data and replace actual temperature data with wind shear proxy. I believe they called it wind vector in the recent paper because they didn't want the derision of their last paper brought up again.

Just because another denier sacred cow was slain, burned and the ashes scattered is no reason to invoke yet another conspiracy theory.

Well, from your POV, it probably is.

The only Sacred Cow being burned right now is the diseased and dying one named CAGW..

 

[mamooth]

"There is no tropospheric hotspot!" was one of most most sacred denier sacred cows.

It died long ago, but deniers have been propping up its rotting corpse. Now the zombie sacred cow has been decapitated, and they don't know what to do.

 

[mamooth]

Billionaire oil company CEO demands geology professors be fired, because he doesn't like the results of their work that linked fracking to earthquakes.

Oil CEO Wanted University Quake Scientists Dismissed Dean s E-Mail - Bloomberg Business

Just another day in the Peoples Democratic Republic of Denierstan. If the science bothers you, censor it.

 

[Wyld Kard]

There's really no point in presenting facts and logic to the hardcore deniers. Such conspiracy cultists weren't reasoned into their beliefs, so they can't be reasoned out of them.

Deniers embrace denialism for the emotional comfort it gives them, the warm fuzzy feeling of belonging to a cult that gives them all the answers and removes any need to think. To get such creatures of emotion to leave their cult, we have to make it emotionally painful for them to remain, and we do that through laughter and mockery.

There's really no point in presenting facts and logic to the hardcore deniers.

Really?
What facts and logic are you referring to, because they must be as elusive as your intelligence is on the subject.

Because all you and the other warmist nutjobs have been doing is claiming global warming / climate change is real by posting bullshit and trying to convince others that is the truth.

 

[Wyld Kard]

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statement that state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. In the meantime, Ernie has obese junkies on the AM radio, fake British Lords, and undegreed ex-TV weathermen.

Problem is, it is not just weather records that are being presented. We have the thawing of the arctic, the shrinking North Polar Ice Cap, the Ice Caps of Greenland and Antarctica losing billions of tons of ice per year, and almost all of our alpine glaciers in rapid retreat. GHGs in the atmosphere are at a level unseen for millions of years. But the deniars just continue to state that nothing is happening.

AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

Just because you keep posting that particular group of words over and over, does not make it true, dumbass.

 

[Billy_Bob]

"There is no tropospheric hotspot!" was one of most most sacred denier sacred cows.

It died long ago, but deniers have been propping up its rotting corpse. Now the zombie sacred cow has been decapitated, and they don't know what to do.

prove it snagletooth...

 

[Billy_Bob]

Billionaire oil company CEO demands geology professors be fired, because he doesn't like the results of their work that linked fracking to earthquakes.

Oil CEO Wanted University Quake Scientists Dismissed Dean s E-Mail - Bloomberg Business

Just another day in the Peoples Democratic Republic of Denierstan. If the science bothers you, censor it.

What do you demand when scientists fake a link. Scientific fraud by those men needs to be addressed by termination. But then you think fraud is ok when it serves your political purpose.

 

[Old Rocks]

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University has policy statement that state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger. In the meantime, Ernie has obese junkies on the AM radio, fake British Lords, and undegreed ex-TV weathermen.

Problem is, it is not just weather records that are being presented. We have the thawing of the arctic, the shrinking North Polar Ice Cap, the Ice Caps of Greenland and Antarctica losing billions of tons of ice per year, and almost all of our alpine glaciers in rapid retreat. GHGs in the atmosphere are at a level unseen for millions of years. But the deniars just continue to state that nothing is happening.

AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

Just because you keep posting that particular group of words over and over, does not make it true, dumbass.

OK, dear little corksmoker, link us to Scientific Societies that AGW is not real. Same for National Academies of Science and major Universities. You cannot, because there are none. So you are just flapping yap.

 

[jc456]

Sure it is. Mainstream climate "science" is purely about political and economic control. Show us one thing that climatologists have suggested that actually reduces pollution. Go ahead I dare you.

Restricting coal use.

That was easy.

Seriously, why did you ask such a question, when the answer was so obvious?

What are you replacing its power with to keep humans alive?