Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
NOAA is a lying fraud?You cant make this stuff up.
Clearly you can, because you just did. You posted Spencer's completely fudged graph. It's been pointed out tot you before that it's fraudulent, so you know it's fraudulent, but you posted the fraud anyway.
Back in reality, the models have been excellent. Anyone pretending otherwise is a lying fraud. Every denier on this thread is such a lying fraud.
That makes no sense.
The atmosphere gets much colder the higher you get, so there can be hardly any conduction or convection going on.
The heat attempting to leave the earth HAS to be radiative.
No other form of heat can possibly leave the earth since the earth is surrounded by a vacuum that can not conduct or convent anything.
What you are trying to claim is that greenhouse gases do not exist, and clearly they to.
...especially when you start with your desired conclusion and write the models to fit, using altered data.They don't know why? I'm no computer expert but I know one thing, faulty information leads to faulty conclusions.
Modeling is an iterative process.
You try a hypothesis, and when it fails, you look for a correction.
When that works better, you keep that correction, and move on to the next smaller tweak.
When modeling is inaccurate, that does not mean you are totally wrong.
But with climate, we have actual data so do not rely on modeling to tell us we have a problem.
Modeling is only to project an extrapolation into the future, beyond the global warming we already know about for sure.
are you saying ice never melted before?They don't know why? I'm no computer expert but I know one thing, faulty information leads to faulty conclusions.
If you include the massive heat energy consumed by ice melting phase change, then the temperatures we are recording are exactly as predicted.
NEVER to this degree.
There was no North Pole navigation route for the last 10,000 years at least, until 2007.
The polar and glacial ice is almost half of what it normally should be.
We don't use models to tell us there is dangerous global warming.
For example, the reality is CO2 is missing. We know how much additional CO2 is added from fossil fuel consumption. But apparently volcanism that we normally associate with additional CO2 release, is also absorbing huge amounts of CO2 from the silicates turning into carbonates. So the models are being tweaked to account for that.
Predictions made by climate modelsIt isn't surprising that NOAA climate models are way off. It would be interesting to
Huh? Models have always been expected to be inaccurate? Al Gore made a fortune off of those models. He told us the polar ice caps were turning to slush and there would be beachfront property in Kansas cuz the models told him so. The Church of Climatology raked in billions based on the doom and gloom in those models.False.
Models have always been expected to not be accurate.
That is because they assume everything else is static other than the CO2 emissions increase.
And there are several obvious variables.
For example, the higher the CO2 concentrations, the more CO2 will be absorbed by expanded plant growth.
Another is that this also includes possible increase in carbonate shell production, like plankton.
Finally, it also depends on things like volcanoes and landslides, because fresh rock is known to absorb lots of CO2.
Another is that with warming air, you get more water vapor, and that can end up producing more clouds, which can then block more sunlight and cause cooling.
All of these variables had been considered ahead of time, and everyone expected the models to need works.
Models are never the basis for predictions or concerns.
All we need to do is extrapolate existing data graphs to get really worried.
Totally and completely wrong.
Gore had nothing at all to do with climate models.
The trends were already ACTUALLY happening, with polar and glacial ice melts, ocean rising, air temperatures increasing, hurricane increases, etc.
Climate models are ONLY about guessing when accelerators, like water vapor and methane are going to kick in. And no one ever said they could even remotely predict when or how that would likely happen. All we could do is suggest possibilities. For example, we don't know how more heat is going to cause more global warming from increased water vapor because more water vapor in the atmosphere could also create more reflective clouds. We don't know how much frozen methane hydrate in under the ocean or in tundra, so we can't know when or how much that will effect things. There is no way to model these things, and everyone always knew that. Models were only used to give a max/min range. Anyone who claims models were used for actual predictions is just lying.
Predictions made by climate modelsIt isn't surprising that NOAA climate models are way off. It would be interesting to
Huh? Models have always been expected to be inaccurate? Al Gore made a fortune off of those models. He told us the polar ice caps were turning to slush and there would be beachfront property in Kansas cuz the models told him so. The Church of Climatology raked in billions based on the doom and gloom in those models.False.
Models have always been expected to not be accurate.
That is because they assume everything else is static other than the CO2 emissions increase.
And there are several obvious variables.
For example, the higher the CO2 concentrations, the more CO2 will be absorbed by expanded plant growth.
Another is that this also includes possible increase in carbonate shell production, like plankton.
Finally, it also depends on things like volcanoes and landslides, because fresh rock is known to absorb lots of CO2.
Another is that with warming air, you get more water vapor, and that can end up producing more clouds, which can then block more sunlight and cause cooling.
All of these variables had been considered ahead of time, and everyone expected the models to need works.
Models are never the basis for predictions or concerns.
All we need to do is extrapolate existing data graphs to get really worried.
Totally and completely wrong.
Gore had nothing at all to do with climate models.
The trends were already ACTUALLY happening, with polar and glacial ice melts, ocean rising, air temperatures increasing, hurricane increases, etc.
Climate models are ONLY about guessing when accelerators, like water vapor and methane are going to kick in. And no one ever said they could even remotely predict when or how that would likely happen. All we could do is suggest possibilities. For example, we don't know how more heat is going to cause more global warming from increased water vapor because more water vapor in the atmosphere could also create more reflective clouds. We don't know how much frozen methane hydrate in under the ocean or in tundra, so we can't know when or how much that will effect things. There is no way to model these things, and everyone always knew that. Models were only used to give a max/min range. Anyone who claims models were used for actual predictions is just lying.
Predictions of Future Global Climate
The First Climate Model Turns 50, And Predicted Global Warming Almost Perfectly
Climate Models & Predictions for the Future
Climate models are often used to predict the climate of an Earth in which the carbon dioxide concentration has doubled. This is a prospect very likely to occur within the next 50-100 years, given the current increasing rates of anthropogenic CO2.Oh, look. Climate models being used for actual predictions...you know, the exact opposite of what you claimed.
Below are some results of climate models run under twice the current global carbon dioxide concentration. The model predictions for future climate are based on forward estimates of the rate of fossil fuel consumption, and thus the production of CO2 and its input to the atmosphere.
You should just stop now.
NOAA is a lying fraud?
It's true because they want it to be true.Predictions made by climate modelsIt isn't surprising that NOAA climate models are way off. It would be interesting to
Huh? Models have always been expected to be inaccurate? Al Gore made a fortune off of those models. He told us the polar ice caps were turning to slush and there would be beachfront property in Kansas cuz the models told him so. The Church of Climatology raked in billions based on the doom and gloom in those models.False.
Models have always been expected to not be accurate.
That is because they assume everything else is static other than the CO2 emissions increase.
And there are several obvious variables.
For example, the higher the CO2 concentrations, the more CO2 will be absorbed by expanded plant growth.
Another is that this also includes possible increase in carbonate shell production, like plankton.
Finally, it also depends on things like volcanoes and landslides, because fresh rock is known to absorb lots of CO2.
Another is that with warming air, you get more water vapor, and that can end up producing more clouds, which can then block more sunlight and cause cooling.
All of these variables had been considered ahead of time, and everyone expected the models to need works.
Models are never the basis for predictions or concerns.
All we need to do is extrapolate existing data graphs to get really worried.
Totally and completely wrong.
Gore had nothing at all to do with climate models.
The trends were already ACTUALLY happening, with polar and glacial ice melts, ocean rising, air temperatures increasing, hurricane increases, etc.
Climate models are ONLY about guessing when accelerators, like water vapor and methane are going to kick in. And no one ever said they could even remotely predict when or how that would likely happen. All we could do is suggest possibilities. For example, we don't know how more heat is going to cause more global warming from increased water vapor because more water vapor in the atmosphere could also create more reflective clouds. We don't know how much frozen methane hydrate in under the ocean or in tundra, so we can't know when or how much that will effect things. There is no way to model these things, and everyone always knew that. Models were only used to give a max/min range. Anyone who claims models were used for actual predictions is just lying.
Predictions of Future Global Climate
The First Climate Model Turns 50, And Predicted Global Warming Almost Perfectly
Climate Models & Predictions for the Future
Climate models are often used to predict the climate of an Earth in which the carbon dioxide concentration has doubled. This is a prospect very likely to occur within the next 50-100 years, given the current increasing rates of anthropogenic CO2.Oh, look. Climate models being used for actual predictions...you know, the exact opposite of what you claimed.
Below are some results of climate models run under twice the current global carbon dioxide concentration. The model predictions for future climate are based on forward estimates of the rate of fossil fuel consumption, and thus the production of CO2 and its input to the atmosphere.
You should just stop now.
Predictions are only true if the measurements are accurate. What we have found out is that the AGW scammers have created false measurements to cover up reality. They get caught at it all the time. That even admitted it in the emails exposed by Climategate I&II. Obama even corrupted NASA abd NOAA to create false data.
AGW is a big scam. We all know that as a fact. The stupid Moon Bats may not know it but they are as ignorant of Climate Science as they are of Economics, History, Biology, Ethics, The Constitution and just about everything else.
How about that NYC is not under water? Is that inconvenient Al?
"All the altered data", you mean.NOAA is a lying fraud?
What a profoudnly retarded statement on your part. NOAA didn't say any of the crap your cult claims. Spencer and the all the deniers are just pushing fraud when they claim such nonsense.
I understand why all denier cultists rely entirely on fraud. All the data contradicts their loopy conspiracy babbling. Honesty is not an option for denier cultists, since they'd be ejected from their authoritarian cult if they told the truth. To cult herd animals like deniers, the loss of their herd would be a death sentence, so they'll tell whatever lies are necessary to remain in good standing with their herd/cult.
Again, the models have been excellent. For the same reasons that we know flat-earthers are lying, we know deniers are lying -- because the data says so. Now, I'm going to present you with actual data, and hen laugh as you get triggered. Here's the actual model record, and it's been excellent.
Climate model projections compared to observations
No such prediction was made?How about that NYC is not under water? Is that inconvenient Al?
No such prediction was made. that's another fraud deniers push. I understand you don't know that, because you only know what your cult masters tell you, and they feed you pure bullshit.
Thanks for confirming my point, that every single thing ever denier says should always initially be assumed to be fraudulent, because that's almost always the case.
It's true because they want it to be true.
They really do believe reality bends to their emotions. Utterly pathetic.
How about that NYC is not under water? Is that inconvenient Al?
No such prediction was made. that's another fraud deniers push. I understand you don't know that, because you only know what your cult masters tell you, and they feed you pure bullshit.
Uh huh. Say, what about your claim that no one predicted the oceans would rise into NYC? I just proved you wrong about that.It's true because they want it to be true.
They really do believe reality bends to their emotions. Utterly pathetic.
You're like a flat-earther screaming about how all the round-earthers are brainwashed. Amusing, and pathetic.
You cult masters lied to you about the models.
Someone with a spine would call them to task for that.
You won't. The prospect of not having your cult to tell you what to think and do terrifies you too much.
