November, 2016, warm

[ding]

Well Ding, you have found your peer level with Silly Billy and Frankie Boi. Is your moons also hollow?

Do you see the saw tooth behavior during each interglacial period where temperature falls and then spike up?

Do you see where that is happening today and how it looks like all of the others and explains why your bullshit argument about the temperature declining for the past 1000 years before spiking now is meaningless?

Do you see where we are not outside of the temperature range of past interglacial cycles?

Now run away, dumbfuck. Run away.

Global Warming : Feature Articles

Wow... doesn't that look like we have a problem!!!!

Not really. It is all part of a natural cycle that has been occurring for the past 400,000 years.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now little cocksuck, I can clearly see the total runup at the end is double what any other is on that graph. In fact, to find one that exceeds it, you have to go back to the Younger Dryas.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Now little cocksuck, I can clearly see the total runup at the end is double what any other is on that graph. In fact, to find one that exceeds it, you have to go back to the Younger Dryas.

There is no having an intelligent debate with you two morons.. You and Crick have no ability to think critically or cognitively.. You continually repost the SKS crayon kids crap..

 

[Billy_Bob]

CO2 lags the warm up by 200-800 years.

When warmth drives up CO2 levels. But this has nothing to do with the current situation, when CO2 levels are up due to human combustion of fossil fuels. Your lag is irrelevant.

Were out of the end of the LIA just about 200 years and graphing spatial resolution can not show spikes lasting less than 500 years.

Bullshit. You are either stupid as fuck or knowingly lying. The chronological resolution of temperature and CO2 proxies from the end of the LIA (2oo years ago you say) is not 500 years. Your attempt to claim this is the source of elevated CO2 is pathetic. Did you forget that both the isotopic analysis and the bookkeeping method agree that human activity has produced virtually every bit of the additional CO2? How stupid ARE you?

So what we are graphing from empirical evidence today can not be seen in historical data from other sources... You can not prove nor disprove that our current temp rise has never happened before..

It is EXTREMELY likely to be unique within the last 22,000 years. And guess what dipwad, proxy data IS empirical data.

Yet you and your ilk make wild ass assumptions and guesses from a position of ignorance about Science. Remind me again how many of the CMIP models failed.. ALL 126 of them...

Lying sack of shit.

What we can prove is CO2 continues to rise, even after the warming has stopped because it continued to rise for some 800 years before rapidly dropping as the earth enters the next glacial cycle.

What we can prove is that you're an ignorant liar.

lol... 0.0005 is what man contributes..98% of CO2 is Naturally occurring... Water vapor is showing that minisclue rise doesn't mean shit and easily counters it.. The Paleo record calls BS on AGW...

Empirical evidence shows AGW a farce... And you have no clue about what graphing is capable of showing..

 

[gipper]

CO2 lags the warm up by 200-800 years.

When warmth drives up CO2 levels. But this has nothing to do with the current situation, when CO2 levels are up due to human combustion of fossil fuels. Your lag is irrelevant.

Were out of the end of the LIA just about 200 years and graphing spatial resolution can not show spikes lasting less than 500 years.

Bullshit. You are either stupid as fuck or knowingly lying. The chronological resolution of temperature and CO2 proxies from the end of the LIA (2oo years ago you say) is not 500 years. Your attempt to claim this is the source of elevated CO2 is pathetic. Did you forget that both the isotopic analysis and the bookkeeping method agree that human activity has produced virtually every bit of the additional CO2? How stupid ARE you?

So what we are graphing from empirical evidence today can not be seen in historical data from other sources... You can not prove nor disprove that our current temp rise has never happened before..

It is EXTREMELY likely to be unique within the last 22,000 years. And guess what dipwad, proxy data IS empirical data.

Yet you and your ilk make wild ass assumptions and guesses from a position of ignorance about Science. Remind me again how many of the CMIP models failed.. ALL 126 of them...

Lying sack of shit.

What we can prove is CO2 continues to rise, even after the warming has stopped because it continued to rise for some 800 years before rapidly dropping as the earth enters the next glacial cycle.

What we can prove is that you're an ignorant liar.

lol... 0.0005 is what man contributes..98% of CO2 is Naturally occurring... Water vapor is showing that minisclue rise doesn't mean shit and easily counters it.. The Paleo record calls BS on AGW...

Empirical evidence shows AGW a farce... And you have no clue about what graphing is capable of showing..

Clearly AGW is a farce, but sadly many poorly educated easily duped dupes believe it.

We need to come up with a plan to take warmer's money. They are so fearful and believe with all their little hearts, that if we could come up with a con game like Fat Al Gore, we could be amazingly RICH!!! Plus the foolish warmers would think they are contributing. Its a Win-Win!!!

 

[ScienceRocks]

CO2 lags the warm up by 200-800 years.

When warmth drives up CO2 levels. But this has nothing to do with the current situation, when CO2 levels are up due to human combustion of fossil fuels. Your lag is irrelevant.

Were out of the end of the LIA just about 200 years and graphing spatial resolution can not show spikes lasting less than 500 years.

Bullshit. You are either stupid as fuck or knowingly lying. The chronological resolution of temperature and CO2 proxies from the end of the LIA (2oo years ago you say) is not 500 years. Your attempt to claim this is the source of elevated CO2 is pathetic. Did you forget that both the isotopic analysis and the bookkeeping method agree that human activity has produced virtually every bit of the additional CO2? How stupid ARE you?

So what we are graphing from empirical evidence today can not be seen in historical data from other sources... You can not prove nor disprove that our current temp rise has never happened before..

It is EXTREMELY likely to be unique within the last 22,000 years. And guess what dipwad, proxy data IS empirical data.

Yet you and your ilk make wild ass assumptions and guesses from a position of ignorance about Science. Remind me again how many of the CMIP models failed.. ALL 126 of them...

Lying sack of shit.

What we can prove is CO2 continues to rise, even after the warming has stopped because it continued to rise for some 800 years before rapidly dropping as the earth enters the next glacial cycle.

What we can prove is that you're an ignorant liar.

lol... 0.0005 is what man contributes..98% of CO2 is Naturally occurring... Water vapor is showing that minisclue rise doesn't mean shit and easily counters it.. The Paleo record calls BS on AGW...

Empirical evidence shows AGW a farce... And you have no clue about what graphing is capable of showing..

Clearly AGW is a farce, but sadly many poorly educated easily duped dupes believe it.

We need to come up with a plan to take warmer's money. They are so fearful and believe with all their little hearts, that if we could come up with a con game like Fat Al Gore, we could be amazingly RICH!!! Plus the foolish warmers would think they are contributing. Its a Win-Win!!!

You're the dumb one loserterian. Science has built modern civilization and you wish to destroy it. A fucking fool;.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I EXPECT A WHOLE LOT OF LOW TEMP RECORDS ARE ABOUT TO BE BROKEN...

Don't you know the world is on fire...we only have a few years left before the warmer zombie apocalypse

You have no clue about the subject that you're rejecting...That is how dumb you're.

 

[ding]

Now little cocksuck, I can clearly see the total runup at the end is double what any other is on that graph. In fact, to find one that exceeds it, you have to go back to the Younger Dryas.

Right. So what? Do you see the saw tooth behavior of each interglacial cycle? Do see where the temperature goes down and then back up again? So in interglacial cycles temperature can go down and then up again. It is not the CO2 that is controlling that. My point here is that that little graph you like to show doesn't show what you think it shows. We are not experiencing anything outside of the norm of an interglacial cycle. The time for CO2 to heat up the system is way way too long for that. Therefore, instead of worrying about global warming, you really should worry much more about global cooling. Increasing CO2 is a good thing.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Nov was the hottest month since April based on the NCEP daily data.

There's no way this year is going to be anything else than number fucking one...Why that is occurring is co2.

 

[gipper]

CO2 lags the warm up by 200-800 years.

When warmth drives up CO2 levels. But this has nothing to do with the current situation, when CO2 levels are up due to human combustion of fossil fuels. Your lag is irrelevant.

Were out of the end of the LIA just about 200 years and graphing spatial resolution can not show spikes lasting less than 500 years.

Bullshit. You are either stupid as fuck or knowingly lying. The chronological resolution of temperature and CO2 proxies from the end of the LIA (2oo years ago you say) is not 500 years. Your attempt to claim this is the source of elevated CO2 is pathetic. Did you forget that both the isotopic analysis and the bookkeeping method agree that human activity has produced virtually every bit of the additional CO2? How stupid ARE you?

So what we are graphing from empirical evidence today can not be seen in historical data from other sources... You can not prove nor disprove that our current temp rise has never happened before..

It is EXTREMELY likely to be unique within the last 22,000 years. And guess what dipwad, proxy data IS empirical data.

Yet you and your ilk make wild ass assumptions and guesses from a position of ignorance about Science. Remind me again how many of the CMIP models failed.. ALL 126 of them...

Lying sack of shit.

What we can prove is CO2 continues to rise, even after the warming has stopped because it continued to rise for some 800 years before rapidly dropping as the earth enters the next glacial cycle.

What we can prove is that you're an ignorant liar.

lol... 0.0005 is what man contributes..98% of CO2 is Naturally occurring... Water vapor is showing that minisclue rise doesn't mean shit and easily counters it.. The Paleo record calls BS on AGW...

Empirical evidence shows AGW a farce... And you have no clue about what graphing is capable of showing..

Clearly AGW is a farce, but sadly many poorly educated easily duped dupes believe it.

We need to come up with a plan to take warmer's money. They are so fearful and believe with all their little hearts, that if we could come up with a con game like Fat Al Gore, we could be amazingly RICH!!! Plus the foolish warmers would think they are contributing. Its a Win-Win!!!

You're the dumb one loserterian. Science has built modern civilization and you wish to destroy it. A fucking fool;.

Too funny you think the government is responsible for all things.

 

[Crick]

CO2 lags the warm up by 200-800 years.

When warmth drives up CO2 levels. But this has nothing to do with the current situation, when CO2 levels are up due to human combustion of fossil fuels. Your lag is irrelevant.

Were out of the end of the LIA just about 200 years and graphing spatial resolution can not show spikes lasting less than 500 years.

Bullshit. You are either stupid as fuck or knowingly lying. The chronological resolution of temperature and CO2 proxies from the end of the LIA (2oo years ago you say) is not 500 years. Your attempt to claim this is the source of elevated CO2 is pathetic. Did you forget that both the isotopic analysis and the bookkeeping method agree that human activity has produced virtually every bit of the additional CO2? How stupid ARE you?

So what we are graphing from empirical evidence today can not be seen in historical data from other sources... You can not prove nor disprove that our current temp rise has never happened before..

It is EXTREMELY likely to be unique within the last 22,000 years. And guess what dipwad, proxy data IS empirical data.

Yet you and your ilk make wild ass assumptions and guesses from a position of ignorance about Science. Remind me again how many of the CMIP models failed.. ALL 126 of them...

Lying sack of shit.

What we can prove is CO2 continues to rise, even after the warming has stopped because it continued to rise for some 800 years before rapidly dropping as the earth enters the next glacial cycle.

What we can prove is that you're an ignorant liar.

lol... 0.0005 is what man contributes..98% of CO2 is Naturally occurring... Water vapor is showing that minisclue rise doesn't mean shit and easily counters it.. The Paleo record calls BS on AGW...

Empirical evidence shows AGW a farce... And you have no clue about what graphing is capable of showing..

Clearly AGW is a farce, but sadly many poorly educated easily duped dupes believe it.

We need to come up with a plan to take warmer's money. They are so fearful and believe with all their little hearts, that if we could come up with a con game like Fat Al Gore, we could be amazingly RICH!!! Plus the foolish warmers would think they are contributing. Its a Win-Win!!!

You're the dumb one loserterian. Science has built modern civilization and you wish to destroy it. A fucking fool;.

Too funny you think the government is responsible for all things.

And you think to think that science and government are equivalent. Who told you that? Your preacher?

 

[gipper]

When warmth drives up CO2 levels. But this has nothing to do with the current situation, when CO2 levels are up due to human combustion of fossil fuels. Your lag is irrelevant.

Bullshit. You are either stupid as fuck or knowingly lying. The chronological resolution of temperature and CO2 proxies from the end of the LIA (2oo years ago you say) is not 500 years. Your attempt to claim this is the source of elevated CO2 is pathetic. Did you forget that both the isotopic analysis and the bookkeeping method agree that human activity has produced virtually every bit of the additional CO2? How stupid ARE you?

It is EXTREMELY likely to be unique within the last 22,000 years. And guess what dipwad, proxy data IS empirical data.

Lying sack of shit.

What we can prove is that you're an ignorant liar.

lol... 0.0005 is what man contributes..98% of CO2 is Naturally occurring... Water vapor is showing that minisclue rise doesn't mean shit and easily counters it.. The Paleo record calls BS on AGW...

Empirical evidence shows AGW a farce... And you have no clue about what graphing is capable of showing..

Clearly AGW is a farce, but sadly many poorly educated easily duped dupes believe it.

We need to come up with a plan to take warmer's money. They are so fearful and believe with all their little hearts, that if we could come up with a con game like Fat Al Gore, we could be amazingly RICH!!! Plus the foolish warmers would think they are contributing. Its a Win-Win!!!

You're the dumb one loserterian. Science has built modern civilization and you wish to destroy it. A fucking fool;.

Too funny you think the government is responsible for all things.

And you think to think that science and government are equivalent. Who told you that? Your preacher?

How did you KNOW!!!

 

[Crick]

Because you were stupid enough to say so.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now little cocksuck, I can clearly see the total runup at the end is double what any other is on that graph. In fact, to find one that exceeds it, you have to go back to the Younger Dryas.

Right. So what? Do you see the saw tooth behavior of each interglacial cycle? Do see where the temperature goes down and then back up again? So in interglacial cycles temperature can go down and then up again. It is not the CO2 that is controlling that. My point here is that that little graph you like to show doesn't show what you think it shows. We are not experiencing anything outside of the norm of an interglacial cycle. The time for CO2 to heat up the system is way way too long for that. Therefore, instead of worrying about global warming, you really should worry much more about global cooling. Increasing CO2 is a good thing.

LOL Damn, you can fly that with the cretins like Silly Billy and jc, but it will not fly with anyone with more than a room temperature IQ. The two graph are on very different time scales Put the graphs on the same time scale, and the end point of the recent times graph will look very impressive compared to the other graph.

 

[ding]

Now little cocksuck, I can clearly see the total runup at the end is double what any other is on that graph. In fact, to find one that exceeds it, you have to go back to the Younger Dryas.

Right. So what? Do you see the saw tooth behavior of each interglacial cycle? Do see where the temperature goes down and then back up again? So in interglacial cycles temperature can go down and then up again. It is not the CO2 that is controlling that. My point here is that that little graph you like to show doesn't show what you think it shows. We are not experiencing anything outside of the norm of an interglacial cycle. The time for CO2 to heat up the system is way way too long for that. Therefore, instead of worrying about global warming, you really should worry much more about global cooling. Increasing CO2 is a good thing.

LOL Damn, you can fly that with the cretins like Silly Billy and jc, but it will not fly with anyone with more than a room temperature IQ. The two graph are on very different time scales Put the graphs on the same time scale, and the end point of the recent times graph will look very impressive compared to the other graph.

Use the interglacial graph for both analyses

 

[gipper]

Now little cocksuck, I can clearly see the total runup at the end is double what any other is on that graph. In fact, to find one that exceeds it, you have to go back to the Younger Dryas.

Right. So what? Do you see the saw tooth behavior of each interglacial cycle? Do see where the temperature goes down and then back up again? So in interglacial cycles temperature can go down and then up again. It is not the CO2 that is controlling that. My point here is that that little graph you like to show doesn't show what you think it shows. We are not experiencing anything outside of the norm of an interglacial cycle. The time for CO2 to heat up the system is way way too long for that. Therefore, instead of worrying about global warming, you really should worry much more about global cooling. Increasing CO2 is a good thing.

LOL Damn, you can fly that with the cretins like Silly Billy and jc, but it will not fly with anyone with more than a room temperature IQ. The two graph are on very different time scales Put the graphs on the same time scale, and the end point of the recent times graph will look very impressive compared to the other graph.

Use the interglacial graph for both analyses

He clearly has no ability to understand a graph and most other things.

 

[skookerasbil]

So..........which s0ns, has more of an impact on the public perception?

A few tenths of a degree for a month?

Or would it be.............THIS >>


Chicago breaks 1940 snowfall record...
TEMP PLUNGE USA...
-35° ...
LIVE CHILL MAP...