"Holy crap it's cold today. D*mn global warming"

[westwall]

No ,it isn't a clear and present danger. I have studied it.

It's about time we go back to the impending Ice Age as projected in the 80's.

Lots of folks have staked their careers on Global Warming/Climate Change/ hoopla ... Not like they are ever going to admit they might be a little off.
The same type folks that want to express driving a Prius here will go further towards fixing Global Warming than any of the other countries we share the globe with cleaning up their act.

It is all headed for United Nations bull ... Won't be long until we are trading Carbon Credits on Cricket Futures ... Cleaning up the air and feeding the poor at the same time.

.

You do realize how completely full of shit you are, correct? Here is what Dr. Hansen published in 1981, the link leads to the full article, so you can educate yourself as to what the scientists were really stating in the '80's.

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.



Lacis et al. 1981
Lacis, A., J. Hansen, P. Lee, T. Mitchell, and S. Lebedeff, 1981: Greenhouse effect of trace gases, 1970-1980. Geophys. Res. Lett., 8, 1035-1038, doi:10.1029/GL008i010p01035.

Increased abundances were measured for several trace atmospheric gases in the decade 1970-1980. The equilibrium greenhouse warming for the measured increments of CH4, chlorofluorocarbons and N2O is between 50% and 100% of the equilibrium warming for the measured increases of atmospheric CO2 during the same 10 years. The combined warming of CO2 and trace gases should exceed natural global temperature variability in the 1980s and cause the global mean temperature to rise above the maximum of the late 1930s.

• Download PDF (392 kB; scanned; no OCR)

And his predictions were 300% off while the CO2 levels were far higher than even he predicted. Not a source I would use.

 

[BlackSand]

No ,it isn't a clear and present danger. I have studied it.

It's about time we go back to the impending Ice Age as projected in the 80's.

Lots of folks have staked their careers on Global Warming/Climate Change/ hoopla ... Not like they are ever going to admit they might be a little off.
The same type folks that want to express driving a Prius here will go further towards fixing Global Warming than any of the other countries we share the globe with cleaning up their act.

It is all headed for United Nations bull ... Won't be long until we are trading Carbon Credits on Cricket Futures ... Cleaning up the air and feeding the poor at the same time.

.

You do realize how completely full of shit you are, correct? Here is what Dr. Hansen published in 1981, the link leads to the full article, so you can educate yourself as to what the scientists were really stating in the '80's.

Here you go dumbass ... Complete with TIME Magazine cover stories.

The 1970s Ice Age Myth and Time Magazine Covers by David Kirtley Greg Laden s Blog

.

 

[orogenicman]

No ,it isn't a clear and present danger. I have studied it.

It's about time we go back to the impending Ice Age as projected in the 80's.

Lots of folks have staked their careers on Global Warming/Climate Change/ hoopla ... Not like they are ever going to admit they might be a little off.
The same type folks that want to express driving a Prius here will go further towards fixing Global Warming than any of the other countries we share the globe with cleaning up their act.

It is all headed for United Nations bull ... Won't be long until we are trading Carbon Credits on Cricket Futures ... Cleaning up the air and feeding the poor at the same time.

.

You do realize how completely full of shit you are, correct? Here is what Dr. Hansen published in 1981, the link leads to the full article, so you can educate yourself as to what the scientists were really stating in the '80's.

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.



Lacis et al. 1981
Lacis, A., J. Hansen, P. Lee, T. Mitchell, and S. Lebedeff, 1981: Greenhouse effect of trace gases, 1970-1980. Geophys. Res. Lett., 8, 1035-1038, doi:10.1029/GL008i010p01035.

Increased abundances were measured for several trace atmospheric gases in the decade 1970-1980. The equilibrium greenhouse warming for the measured increments of CH4, chlorofluorocarbons and N2O is between 50% and 100% of the equilibrium warming for the measured increases of atmospheric CO2 during the same 10 years. The combined warming of CO2 and trace gases should exceed natural global temperature variability in the 1980s and cause the global mean temperature to rise above the maximum of the late 1930s.

• Download PDF (392 kB; scanned; no OCR)

And his predictions were 300% off while the CO2 levels were far higher than even he predicted. Not a source I would use.

Of course, being a PhD, you can show us the math that gave you that number, right?

 

[Old Rocks]

No ,it isn't a clear and present danger. I have studied it.

It's about time we go back to the impending Ice Age as projected in the 80's.

Lots of folks have staked their careers on Global Warming/Climate Change/ hoopla ... Not like they are ever going to admit they might be a little off.
The same type folks that want to express driving a Prius here will go further towards fixing Global Warming than any of the other countries we share the globe with cleaning up their act.

It is all headed for United Nations bull ... Won't be long until we are trading Carbon Credits on Cricket Futures ... Cleaning up the air and feeding the poor at the same time.

.

You do realize how completely full of shit you are, correct? Here is what Dr. Hansen published in 1981, the link leads to the full article, so you can educate yourself as to what the scientists were really stating in the '80's.

Here you go dumbass ... Complete with TIME Magazine cover stories.

The 1970s Ice Age Myth and Time Magazine Covers by David Kirtley Greg Laden s Blog

.

And just when did Time magazine achieve the status of a scientific journal?

 

[skookerasbil]

No ,it isn't a clear and present danger. I have studied it.

It's about time we go back to the impending Ice Age as projected in the 80's.

Lots of folks have staked their careers on Global Warming/Climate Change/ hoopla ... Not like they are ever going to admit they might be a little off.
The same type folks that want to express driving a Prius here will go further towards fixing Global Warming than any of the other countries we share the globe with cleaning up their act.

It is all headed for United Nations bull ... Won't be long until we are trading Carbon Credits on Cricket Futures ... Cleaning up the air and feeding the poor at the same time.

.

You do realize how completely full of shit you are, correct? Here is what Dr. Hansen published in 1981, the link leads to the full article, so you can educate yourself as to what the scientists were really stating in the '80's.

Here you go dumbass ... Complete with TIME Magazine cover stories.

The 1970s Ice Age Myth and Time Magazine Covers by David Kirtley Greg Laden s Blog

.

And just when did Time magazine achieve the status of a scientific journal?

6 of one........half a dozen of another.

Time Magazine..........in 2015........has as much credibility as these scientific journals. Because the journals are basing their conclusions on rigged data sets >>

Data Deleted From UN Climate Report Highlight Controversies

BREAKING NEWS scientist admits IPCC used fake data to pressure policy makers Watts Up With That

Breaking New Climate Data Rigging Scandal Rocks US Government Principia Scientific Intl

Climate guru Brace for massive cover-up after data rigging scandal - OSNet Daily

How Wrong Is the IPCC Mother Jones

C3 Failed Predictions The Travesties of Experts

What is Wrong with the IPCC Reprint

 

[skookerasbil]

The IPCC automatically THROWS OUT evidence of global cooling by astrophysicists >>

What is Wrong with the IPCC Reprint


Phony to the level of being stoopid!!!

 

[BlackSand]

And just when did Time magazine achieve the status of a scientific journal?

It was more about getting people to believe the bullshit than whether or not the science was worth the paper it was written on.
I just compared the stupid shit the scientific community (I mean Time magazine didn't use themselves for a source) was saying then about carbon emissions and the impending Ice Age to the stupid shit they now want to say about Global Warming.

At least they have fucked up the junk science enough times now that they will change it to Climate Change.
That way the phony science can blame any weather event on the Climate Change boogeyman.

.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Semantic games. If the absorbed IR stops the heat lower down from leaking out into the atmosphere, and it does, it effectively warms the oceans.

Which means AGW theory is fine, and your claims have problems.

No semantics at all. Long wave IR simply can't penetrate deep enough into water to warm anything more than the bare surface. That then rapidly cools with the atmosphere.

of course it's semantics.

does the atmosphere DIRECTLY heat the oceans? no, IR only penetrates a fraction of a millimeter of the surface. the absorbed energy goes into the pool of energy used to cause evaporation, which then causes convection that carries the latent heat up to the cloud tops.

does the atmosphere INDIRECTLY heat the oceans? yes, by supplying some of the energy necessary for evaporation of water at the boundary less heat is conducted to the surface by conduction. the temperature of water is controlled by both the amount of input and the amount of output. increasing input or decreasing output both cause higher temps, and vice-versa.

Warm water rises. So much for conduction Ian.

I wonder how thermoclines in the ocean are overcome. Seems to me it would take massive amounts of heat or large amounts of out gassing to turn over the layers. I wonder how heat would magically make it under one of those thermoclines without forcing? I guess I dont know Thermal or Liquid dynamics... [/sarcasm]

You have no understanding of either, no sarcasm, just plain truth. Here, for free, learn something, maybe you can use it getting a GED.



Thermohaline circulation[edit]
Further information: Deep ocean water and Thermohaline circulation

Coupling data collected by NASA/JPL by several different satellite-borne sensors, researchers have been able to "break through" the ocean's surface to detect "Meddies" -- super-salty warm-water eddies that originate in the Mediterranean Sea and then sink more than a half-mile underwater in the Atlantic Ocean. The Meddies are shown in red in this scientific figure.
Horizontal and vertical currents also exist below the pycnocline in the ocean's deeper waters. The movement of water due to differences in density as a function of water temperature and salinity is called thermohaline circulation. Ripple marks in sediments, scour lines, and the erosion of rocky outcrops on deep-ocean floorsare evidence that relatively strong, localized bottom currents exist. Some of these currents may move as rapidly as 60 centimeters (24 inches) per second.

These currents are strongly influenced by bottom topography, since dense, bottom water must forcefully flow around seafloor projections. Thus, they are sometimes called contour currents. Bottom currents generally move equator-ward at or near the western boundaries of ocean basins (below the western boundary surface currents). The deep-water masses are not capable of moving water at speeds comparable to that of wind-driven surface currents. Water in some of these currents may move only 1 to 2 meters per day. Even at that slow speed, the Coriolis effect modifies their pattern of flow.

Another wiki entry that defies logic and science... when are you going to learn..

 

[Moonglow]

"Holy crap it's cold today. D*mn global warming" ~Someone said at work today. And over and over in society/media.

It's 2015. We know global warming is fact. We know major corporations spent $millions$ on media to convince small brains it is a hoax so they wouldn't get regulated. Just look at how much the Koch brothers spent on "anti-global warming campaigns" and watch how many people repeated and still repeat that it isn't a fact after it's been proven. Sad.

Party people will repeat anything, and have.

Maybe they have low iron...

 

[Billy_Bob]

No ,it isn't a clear and present danger. I have studied it.

It's about time we go back to the impending Ice Age as projected in the 80's.

Lots of folks have staked their careers on Global Warming/Climate Change/ hoopla ... Not like they are ever going to admit they might be a little off.
The same type folks that want to express driving a Prius here will go further towards fixing Global Warming than any of the other countries we share the globe with cleaning up their act.

It is all headed for United Nations bull ... Won't be long until we are trading Carbon Credits on Cricket Futures ... Cleaning up the air and feeding the poor at the same time.

.

You do realize how completely full of shit you are, correct? Here is what Dr. Hansen published in 1981, the link leads to the full article, so you can educate yourself as to what the scientists were really stating in the '80's.

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.



Lacis et al. 1981
Lacis, A., J. Hansen, P. Lee, T. Mitchell, and S. Lebedeff, 1981: Greenhouse effect of trace gases, 1970-1980. Geophys. Res. Lett., 8, 1035-1038, doi:10.1029/GL008i010p01035.

Increased abundances were measured for several trace atmospheric gases in the decade 1970-1980. The equilibrium greenhouse warming for the measured increments of CH4, chlorofluorocarbons and N2O is between 50% and 100% of the equilibrium warming for the measured increases of atmospheric CO2 during the same 10 years. The combined warming of CO2 and trace gases should exceed natural global temperature variability in the 1980s and cause the global mean temperature to rise above the maximum of the late 1930s.

• Download PDF (392 kB; scanned; no OCR)

As I recall Their predictions failed by a margin of 3X.. Thus their assertions are epically wrong.. Epic Old Fraud fail shown by empirical evidence...You really should try and evaluate the so called papers you use to provide proof of anything.. Want to try again?

 

[mamooth]

As I recall Their predictions failed by a margin of 3X.

No, that's another one of your zombie frauds that you're trying to resurrect. Deniers have a whole graveyard full of zombie frauds.

Back in the real world, Hansen's 1988 prediction was quite good. A little high, but if you extend it out to 2015, it will be close to scenario B. "Failed by a margin of 3" has always been a flat out lie.

 

[bripat9643]

As I recall Their predictions failed by a margin of 3X.

No, that's another one of your zombie frauds that you're trying to resurrect. Deniers have a whole graveyard full of zombie frauds.

Back in the real world, Hansen's 1988 prediction was quite good. A little high, but if you extend it out to 2015, it will be close to scenario B. "Failed by a margin of 3" has always been a flat out lie.

Hansen's predictions suck. Only his best scenario comes anywhere close to the actual recorded temperatures (if you trust those). His worst scenario is almost double the actual record.

 

[Billy_Bob]

As I recall Their predictions failed by a margin of 3X.

No, that's another one of your zombie frauds that you're trying to resurrect. Deniers have a whole graveyard full of zombie frauds.

Back in the real world, Hansen's 1988 prediction was quite good. A little high, but if you extend it out to 2015, it will be close to scenario B. "Failed by a margin of 3" has always been a flat out lie.

Once again you post SKS kids crayolas after massive historical clime reference network adjustments... You are so predictable and it does not match reality... Hansen was nowhere near two standard deviations... Showing that he FAILED... Just like all of your other models..

 

[skookerasbil]

Hansen is a fraud.


duh


Nobody believes the whole stoopid hockey stick shit in 2015........just continues to be the established narrative for the alarmist k00ks. If deniers were losing, the polls would be far different than they are...........every single one says nobody cares about global warming.

 

[mamooth]

Once again you post SKS kids crayolas

You flat out lied about the 300% and got caught, Billy. So 'fess up and apologize for to everyone for lying to their faces again.

 

[ChrisL]

Hansen is a fraud.


duh


Nobody believes the whole stoopid hockey stick shit in 2015........just continues to be the established narrative for the alarmist k00ks. If deniers were losing, the polls would be far different than they are...........every single one says nobody cares about global warming.

I must admit that global warming is probably one of the things I least worry about. I figure that if it's real, then there is nothing we are going to be able to do to stop it. Carbon credits are certainly not going to stop it.

 

[jc456]

Dear little twink, no one is making anything up. The glaciers are receding worldwide, the oceans are warming and becoming more acidic, and nine of the ten warmest years have been since 2000. And in my 71 years, Oregon and Washington have become progressively warmer and drier. That is direct personal observation in all parts of both states.

Yet you've managed to survive all that. Go figure? Look, you wanna spend your own money and live in fear of the Global Warming Boogeyman, that's on you. But don't force the rest of us to. It's a beautiful day where i'm at today. I'm gonna live it to the fullest. I don't fear the Global Warming Boogeyman at all. And i never will.

Evidently, lots of people are with you...............



Kinda laughable............though whats funnier is all the concern with ISIS. Consensus reality cuts across many interesting paths!!!

It's all about fear & control. They want their massive World Government power-grab. But even if their Global Warming Boogeyman is a real threat, most are now concluding there's nothing that can be done to reverse it. So it's a done-deal. Case closed. The endless hysterical fear mongering isn't necessary. And it's definitely time to get the fear mongering out of the schools. The kids don't deserve to be frightened that way. They already have enough on their plates.

In the end it's pretty simple. Humans will either adapt and survive... Or they won't. That's the way it is, and always has been. So i won't be going along with the Globalist Elite power-grab. I'll take my chances with the Global Warming Boogeyman instead. I don't fear him. I'll survive. Bet on that.

that is exactly correct, man will not do anything to the earth that the earth won't rebound from, but man vs man?

 

[jc456]

It's about time we go back to the impending Ice Age as projected in the 80's.

No, by 1980, it was all warming predictions from the real scientists.

Of course, deniers arrived soon after, and started their endless string of failed ice age predictions, which continue to this day. Their record of failure spans decades now.

so I'm confused, what is it that these deniers specifically did?

 

[paulitician]

Dear little twink, no one is making anything up. The glaciers are receding worldwide, the oceans are warming and becoming more acidic, and nine of the ten warmest years have been since 2000. And in my 71 years, Oregon and Washington have become progressively warmer and drier. That is direct personal observation in all parts of both states.

Yet you've managed to survive all that. Go figure? Look, you wanna spend your own money and live in fear of the Global Warming Boogeyman, that's on you. But don't force the rest of us to. It's a beautiful day where i'm at today. I'm gonna live it to the fullest. I don't fear the Global Warming Boogeyman at all. And i never will.

Evidently, lots of people are with you...............



Kinda laughable............though whats funnier is all the concern with ISIS. Consensus reality cuts across many interesting paths!!!

It's all about fear & control. They want their massive World Government power-grab. But even if their Global Warming Boogeyman is a real threat, most are now concluding there's nothing that can be done to reverse it. So it's a done-deal. Case closed. The endless hysterical fear mongering isn't necessary. And it's definitely time to get the fear mongering out of the schools. The kids don't deserve to be frightened that way. They already have enough on their plates.

In the end it's pretty simple. Humans will either adapt and survive... Or they won't. That's the way it is, and always has been. So i won't be going along with the Globalist Elite power-grab. I'll take my chances with the Global Warming Boogeyman instead. I don't fear him. I'll survive. Bet on that.

that is exactly correct, man will not do anything to the earth that the earth won't rebound from, but man vs man?

Yeah and even most of the Global Warming cult leaders (Scientists), have concluded the Boogeyman's effects cannot be reversed. So all the hysterical fear mongering is completely unnecessary.

There's no need for that massive Globalist Elite power-grab. I'm gonna enjoy living free till the Boogeyman comes to end it all. Life's just too short to live in fear.