New research totally debunks global warming!!!

[skookerasbil]

duh.....the data is fake.



Research Team Slams Global Warming Data In New Report: "Not Reality... Totally Inconsistent With Credible Temperature Data"

As world leaders, namely in the European Union, attack President Trump for pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement which would have saddled Americans with billions upon billions of dollars in debt and economic losses, a new bombshell report that analyzed Global Average Surface Temperature (GAST) data produced by NASA, the NOAA and HADLEY proves the President was right on target with his refusal to be a part of the new initiative.

According to the report, which has been peer reviewed by administrators, scientists and researchers from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), and several of America’s leading universities, the data is completely bunk:


Research Team Slams Global Warming Data In New Report: "Not Reality... Totally Inconsistent With Credible Temperature Data" | Zero Hedge


Read the full abstract provided in the link.............

 

[SassyIrishLass]

We've been telling them they were faking the data for years.

Junk science is not science

 

[TNHarley]

The 15 NCA Rebuttal Authors:

Joseph S. D’Aleo Certified Consultant Meteorologist, American Meteorological Society Fellow M.S., Meteorology, University of Wisconsin B.S., Meteorology (cum laude), University of Wisconsin

Dr. Harold H. Doiron Retired VP, Engineering Analysis and Test Division, InDyne, Inc. Ex-NASA JSC, Aerospace Consultant B.S. Physics, University of Louisiana – Lafayette M.S., PhD. Mechanical Engineering, University of Houston

Dr. Don J. Easterbrook Emeritus Professor of Geology, Western Washington University Ph.D., Geology, University of Washington, Seattle M.S., Geology, University of Washington, Seattle B.S., Geology, University of Washington, Seattle

Dr. Theodore R. Eck Ph.D., Economics, Mich. State U.; M.A, Economics, U. of Michigan Fulbright Professor of International Economics Former Chief Economist of Amoco Corp. and Exxon Venezuela Advisory Board of the Gas Technology Institute and Energy Intelligence Group

Dr. Neil Frank B.S., Chemistry, Southwestern College M.S., Ph.D. Meteorology, Florida State Former Director of the National Hurricane Center

Dr. Gordon J. Fulks Ph.D., Physics, University of Chicago M.S., Physics, University of Chicago B.S., Physics, University of Chicago

Dr. William M. Gray Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University Ph.D., Geophysical Sciences, University of Chicago M.S., Meteorology, University of Chicago B.S., Geography, George Washington University

Art Horn B.Sc. Meteorology Lyndon State College Teaches Meteorology/Climatology at Tunxis Community College TV Meteorologist 25 years, lecturer, expert witness, radio broadcaster

Dr. Thomas P. Sheahen Ph.D., Physics, M.I.T. B.S., Physics, M.I.T.

Dr. S. Fred Singer Fellow AAAS, APS, AGU Prof Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, U of VA Ph. D., Physics, Princeton University BEE, Ohio State University

Dr. Anthony R. Lupo IPCC Expert Reviewer Professor, Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri Ph.D., Atmospheric Science, Purdue University M.S., Atmospheric Science, Purdue University

Dr. Madhav Khandekar Retired Scientist, Environment Canada Expert Reviewer IPCC 2007 Climate Change Documents

George Taylor Certified Consulting Meteorologist President Applied Climate Services Two time President of the American Association of State Climatologists B.A. Mathematics, University of California M.S. Meteorology University of Utah

Dr. James P. Wallace III Jim Wallace & Associates, LLC Ph.D., Economics, Minor in Engineering, Brown University M.S., Mechanical Engineering, Brown University B.S., Aeronautical Engineering, Brown University

Dr. George T. Wolff Former Chair EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee Ph.D., Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University M.S., Meteorology, New York University B.S., Chemical Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology May 15, 2014

 

[IanC]

Cool the past, warm the present. Smooth out the bumpy parts. Voila! The models look great.

I thought it was Santer but it was actually Wigley who said this-

From: Tom Wigley <[email protected]>
To: Phil Jones <[email protected]>
Subject: 1940s
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:25:38 -0600
Cc: Ben Santer <[email protected]>

"Phil, Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly explain the 1940s warming blip. If you look at the attached plot you will see that the land also shows the 1940s blip (as I'm sure you know). So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, then this would be significant for the global mean -- but we'd still have to explain the land blip.

I've chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are 1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips -- higher sensitivity plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from. Removing ENSO does not affect this. It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with "why the blip".

Now look at the maturity graph. Anything look odd at 1940? Hahahaha, what a bunch of crooks. Science is supposed to lead you in the direction of the truth. These guys decide what the truth is and then look for evidence to support their position. If none can be found then they just make up shit.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Watch how many liberals show up to insist that the lie they have been fed is actually true. They cling tenaciously to whatever the government says. They are the stupid ones that our government relies on to suck money out of our pockets. They're the same ones that want Obamacare even though it is dying under it's own weight. They are as dangerous to the health of this country as Soros.

 

[jc456]

Cool the past, warm the present. Smooth out the bumpy parts. Voila! The models look great.

I thought it was Santer but it was actually Wigley who said this-

From: Tom Wigley <[email protected]>
To: Phil Jones <[email protected]>
Subject: 1940s
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:25:38 -0600
Cc: Ben Santer <[email protected]>

"Phil, Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly explain the 1940s warming blip. If you look at the attached plot you will see that the land also shows the 1940s blip (as I'm sure you know). So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, then this would be significant for the global mean -- but we'd still have to explain the land blip.

I've chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are 1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips -- higher sensitivity plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from. Removing ENSO does not affect this. It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with "why the blip".

Now look at the maturity graph. Anything look odd at 1940? Hahahaha, what a bunch of crooks. Science is supposed to lead you in the direction of the truth. These guys decide what the truth is and then look for evidence to support their position. If none can be found then they just make up shit.

exactly what the dems do, describe a narrative and make the story fit the narrative. Explained well in your post.

 

[mamooth]

Thread summary: Deniers have all fallen hard for yet another fictional propaganda piece, one made by some very, very well paid fossil fuel company shills. They never learn, deniers. After all if they could learn, they wouldn't be deniers. Each time their conspiracy frauds gets busted, they just ignore it and move right on to the next fraud.

If someone says temperature records have been adjusted to make warming look bigger, they are lying. That's not debatable. It doesn't matter what their motivation for lying is, or if they think they're not lying, they're still lying nonetheless. In the real world, the adjustments to temperature have made the warming look _smaller_.

Therefore, the main denier conspiracy theory craters hard, hence anyone still spouting it is a cult retard. Deniers will now weep and cry about getting busted for fraud again, but nobody cares what that pack of America-hating Putin-stooges does any more.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Thread summary: Deniers have all fallen hard for yet another fictional propaganda piece, one made by some very, very well paid fossil fuel company shills. They never learn, deniers. After all if they could learn, they wouldn't be deniers. Each time their conspiracy frauds gets busted, they just ignore it and move right on to the next fraud.

If someone says temperature records have been adjusted to make warming look bigger, they are lying. That's not debatable. It doesn't matter what their motivation for lying is, or if they think they're not lying, they're still lying nonetheless. In the real world, the adjustments to temperature have made the warming look _smaller_.

Therefore, the main denier conspiracy theory craters hard, hence anyone still spouting it is a cult retard. Deniers will now weep and cry about getting busted for fraud again, but nobody cares what that pack of America-hating Putin-stooges does any more.

Missed the post where they admitted to fudging data didn't ya, loon?

 

[mamooth]

[Missed the post where they admitted to fudging data didn't ya, loon?

Obviously, I've seen many posts where deniers tell that lie. It's what your masters command, after all.

However, your cult has a problem. Your old lies have been debunked so many times that nobody pays any attention to them. You're in desperate need of some fresh material.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

[Missed the post where they admitted to fudging data didn't ya, loon?

Obviously, I've seen many posts where deniers tell that lie. It's what your masters command, after all.

However, your cult has a problem. Your old lies have been debunked so many times that nobody pays any attention to them. You're in desperate need of some fresh material.

Give it a rest ya old bat, the charade is over.

 

[mamooth]

Give it a rest ya old bat, the charade is over.

True. The entire planet now knows for certain that the denier cult always lies about everything.

The butthurt denier weepers here are just some crazy people on the internet. They have as much effect on the real world as the flat-earthers that they resemble so much.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

[QUOTE="SassyIrishLass, post: 17737418, member: 18937"
Give it a rest ya old bat, the charade is over.

True. The entire planet now knows for certain that the denier cult always lies about everything.

The butthurt denier weepers here are just some crazy people on the internet. They have as much effect on the real world as the flat-earthers that they resemble so much.[/QUOTE]

I'm really surprised you didn't take off to Jonestown with Jim Jones, you're so gullible

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Research Team Slams Global Warming Data In New Report: "Not Reality... Totally Inconsistent With Credible Temperature Data"

This idiotic non peer reviewed bag of trash comes from Breitbart and has already been debunked...
FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?

CLAIM
A peer-reviewed study has found evidence that nearly all of global warming has been fabricated by climate scientists.

RATING

FALSE
ORIGIN
On 9 July 2017, Breitbart News ran a story written by chart enthusiast James Delingpole, which carried a characteristically provocative and demonstrably false headline:

‘Nearly All’ Recent Global Warming Is Fabricated, Study Finds

 

[Tax Man]

I think the entire atmospheric warming/global warming being accepted by the entire rest of the world kinda gives way more credence to the concept than a debunked flatearth science report.

 

[OldLady]

duh.....the data is fake.



Research Team Slams Global Warming Data In New Report: "Not Reality... Totally Inconsistent With Credible Temperature Data"

As world leaders, namely in the European Union, attack President Trump for pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement which would have saddled Americans with billions upon billions of dollars in debt and economic losses, a new bombshell report that analyzed Global Average Surface Temperature (GAST) data produced by NASA, the NOAA and HADLEY proves the President was right on target with his refusal to be a part of the new initiative.

According to the report, which has been peer reviewed by administrators, scientists and researchers from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), and several of America’s leading universities, the data is completely bunk:


Research Team Slams Global Warming Data In New Report: "Not Reality... Totally Inconsistent With Credible Temperature Data" | Zero Hedge


Read the full abstract provided in the link.............

Did the glaciers which are melting and the Northeast Passage which is now open forget to read the report?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I think the entire atmospheric warming/global warming being accepted by the entire rest of the world kinda gives way more credence to the concept than a debunked flatearth science report.

Yeah but you loons keep ignoring they keep getting caught fudging data. Why do they need to do that?

Think hard now, I know it's a tough one but you can do it

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I think the entire atmospheric warming/global warming being accepted by the entire rest of the world kinda gives way more credence to the concept than a debunked flatearth science report.

Yeah but you loons keep ignoring they keep getting caught fudging data. Why do they need to do that?

Think hard now, I know it's a tough one but you can do it

No they did not get caught "fudging data" that report is simply a piece of shit ...worthless Scientifically speaking

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I think the entire atmospheric warming/global warming being accepted by the entire rest of the world kinda gives way more credence to the concept than a debunked flatearth science report.

Yeah but you loons keep ignoring they keep getting caught fudging data. Why do they need to do that?

Think hard now, I know it's a tough one but you can do it

No they did not get caught "fudging data" that report is simply a piece of shit ...worthless Scientifically speaking

Oh bullshit they've been getting caught time after time after time, get off the left loon sites and get informed, meme troll

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Oh bullshit they've been getting caught time after time after time, get off the left loon sites and get informed, meme troll

No one got caught ...this report is HOGWASH ..it is not peer reviewed it has no science none

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Oh bullshit they've been getting caught time after time after time, get off the left loon sites and get informed, meme troll

No one got caught ...this report is HOGWASH ..it is not peer reviewed it has no science none

Get informed, loon. I know better.

You loons are too stupid to even know it's BS.