Real Bad News for the "real science".

[IanC]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

in much the same way as most of the years in the 30's were the warmest ever. would we be as concerned about the temperatures as much as we are if the thermometer hadnt been invented in the Little Ice Age, or the satellites hadnt gone up at the end of a cooling period?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Yeah everything is a lie and the temperature data is based on it. Why not just defund scientific study and funds for the temperatures stations now and imprison the scientist.

 

[ScienceRocks]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

in much the same way as most of the years in the 30's were the warmest ever. would we be as concerned about the temperatures as much as we are if the thermometer hadnt been invented in the Little Ice Age, or the satellites hadnt gone up at the end of a cooling period?

No question that the 30s where very hot in the US, but world wide. I never seen anything that says that about world wide. The period of 1930-1959 where the period of peak solar output. Studies say since the med evil warm period.

 

[Old Rocks]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

in much the same way as most of the years in the 30's were the warmest ever. would we be as concerned about the temperatures as much as we are if the thermometer hadnt been invented in the Little Ice Age, or the satellites hadnt gone up at the end of a cooling period?

Really dumb. The rest of the world did indeed have thermometers and we know that we while we are warmer than normal in the '30s, most of the world was not.

The present warming is world wide, and especially evident in the polar regions.

 

[Old Rocks]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

Funny how you allways forget to mention the falsification of the temperature record ala NIWA in New Zealand. They got busted though. Hopefully our congress will investigate Hansens shenanigans as well.

Hopefully we will investigate the money that Inhofe gets from the energy corperations.

 

[westwall]

Yeah everything is a lie and the temperature data is based on it. Why not just defund scientific study and funds for the temperatures stations now and imprison the scientist.

I would love to see a real audit of the alarmists work. I would also love to see a real investigation of their methodologies. I think Hansen is engaged in fraud as is Mann, Jones, Trenberth and Briffa. I think that that is proveable in a court of law. I would love to see it happen.

I have never advocated defunding scientific study so pull your head out of your butt. However, these guys have done far more harm than good. They have set climatology back 20 years at minimum. They have harmed all of science because of their perfidy. they shuld pay for that.

 

[westwall]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

Funny how you allways forget to mention the falsification of the temperature record ala NIWA in New Zealand. They got busted though. Hopefully our congress will investigate Hansens shenanigans as well.

Hopefully we will investigate the money that Inhofe gets from the energy corperations.

Great idea! Then we can see who the energy companies have given money to on the alarmist side too!

 

[saveliberty]

Right now its subzero here, not subsurface. If the ice is about all gone, why are my feet still dry?

 

[edthecynic]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

in much the same way as most of the years in the 30's were the warmest ever. would we be as concerned about the temperatures as much as we are if the thermometer hadnt been invented in the Little Ice Age, or the satellites hadnt gone up at the end of a cooling period?

What cooling period????????

There was a FLAT period from the 1940s to the 1970s between two WARMING periods but there has NEVER been a COOLING period in the entire temperature history of direct instrument measurement.

What is this imaginary COOLING period you fantasize about?????

 

[IanC]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

in much the same way as most of the years in the 30's were the warmest ever. would we be as concerned about the temperatures as much as we are if the thermometer hadnt been invented in the Little Ice Age, or the satellites hadnt gone up at the end of a cooling period?

What cooling period????????

There was a FLAT period from the 1940s to the 1970s between two WARMING periods but there has NEVER been a COOLING period in the entire temperature history of direct instrument measurement.

What is this imaginary COOLING period you fantasize about?????

the period from about 1950-1980, the one that caused the New Ice Age Hoax. I can't help it that people like Hansen have massaged the data to the point that it doesn't look like a cooling period anymore.

 

[skookerasbil]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

even if they were ( which they arent).............nobody cares. Try telling people in the northest this AM that the world is frying up!! The k00ks can claim what they want..........in the court of public opinion, nobody want to hear about this BS global warming stuff causing your electric bill to double. Case closed..............so if 49 out of the last 50 years were warmer, still, its a big "meh" to everyone except the k00ks.

Florida has set 10 record low temps this winter..........Syracuse New York has gotten 9 feet of snow.........try telling them about the last 10 years "according the the accumulated data".!!!

 

[konradv]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

even if they were ( which they arent).............nobody cares. Try telling people in the northest this AM that the world is frying up!! The k00ks can claim what they want..........in the court of public opinion, nobody want to hear about this BS global warming stuff causing your electric bill to double. Case closed..............so if 49 out of the last 50 years were warmer, still, its a big "meh" to everyone except the k00ks.

Florida has set 10 record low temps this winter..........Syracuse New York has gotten 9 feet of snow.........try telling them about the last 10 years "according the the accumulated data".!!!

Science doesn't go by public opinion or we'd still be saying the sun rises in the east.

 

[daveman]

nine of the last 10 years have been among the warmest ever.

Thanks for reminding us, skooks.

even if they were ( which they arent).............nobody cares. Try telling people in the northest this AM that the world is frying up!! The k00ks can claim what they want..........in the court of public opinion, nobody want to hear about this BS global warming stuff causing your electric bill to double. Case closed..............so if 49 out of the last 50 years were warmer, still, its a big "meh" to everyone except the k00ks.

Florida has set 10 record low temps this winter..........Syracuse New York has gotten 9 feet of snow.........try telling them about the last 10 years "according the the accumulated data".!!!

Science doesn't go by public opinion or we'd still be saying the sun rises in the east.

Ummm...

Sunrise is the instant at which the upper edge of the Sun appears above the horizon in the east.

 

[Old Rocks]

in much the same way as most of the years in the 30's were the warmest ever. would we be as concerned about the temperatures as much as we are if the thermometer hadnt been invented in the Little Ice Age, or the satellites hadnt gone up at the end of a cooling period?

What cooling period????????

There was a FLAT period from the 1940s to the 1970s between two WARMING periods but there has NEVER been a COOLING period in the entire temperature history of direct instrument measurement.

What is this imaginary COOLING period you fantasize about?????

the period from about 1950-1980, the one that caused the New Ice Age Hoax. I can't help it that people like Hansen have massaged the data to the point that it doesn't look like a cooling period anymore.

Well, Ian, sorry to see that you are well into lying to support you point of view. For there never was a New Ice Age Hoax by scientists. One of the articles frequently quoted as stating that an ice age was coming is from the National Geographic. Here the paragraph from which the quotes are taken out of context, is presented in its entirety;

National Geographic, November 1976

So now, some example of people dishonestly quoting the article:

The New American says (V20 #21, Oct 2004) National Geographic now claims that the Earth is heating up at an alarming rate. But in 1976 the magazine worried that falling temperatures could lead to another ice age.

Mike Oliver, at "energytruth.com" says In November, 1976 the National Geographic carried a warning that "the oceans would eventually freeze" and "snow would advance to the equator".

Bob Foster, on the Lavoisier group website: Back in the 70s, the greater concern was the possibility of global cooling.

Whats amusing about this, is that he describes the article as "a measured account of thinking at the time", which it is (as well as you can expect from the non-science press): its just that the measure is not what he says it is.
Will that do? They aren't particularly notable but they indicate the kind of stuff you see. None of these quotes is actually untrue: the dishonesty lies in their implying that cooling was either the only prediction, or considered much more likely.

Lets take that second pair of quotes and put them into context. Which is page 582: left column: 2 pix, one of J Murray Mitchell, captioned: "Cooling trend of world climate was documented in the 1960's by J Murray Mitchell... Now, he notes, [CO2] pollution may be contributing to an opposite, or warming, tendency". The second is of Reid Bryson (looking particularly wacky) captioned: "'Human Volcano': Read A Bryson of the University of Wisconsin coined that phrase to describe how an exploding population has flung particulate matter, such as dust from cultivation, into the atmosphere. There it blocks solar rays, and surface temperatures drop. In the complex climate equation, this may be the critical factor, he believes." Right column is text "It is possible we are on the brink of a several-decade-long period of rapid warming...", with a text box in bold: "Were the cooling trend to reverse... the earth could warm relatively rapidly, with potentially catastrophic effect. National Science Foundation, 1975", then "The CO2 level is already up by 10% since 1850; by the year 2000, experts say, it may have risen another 20%, enough to cause a 0.6oC rise in average world temperature.". Then we get a new section, about whether particulates warm or cool. Then we get the quote: "But the sensitivity of climate was pointed up independently by a Soviet and an American scientist, who conclused that a permanent drop of only 1.6 to 2 percent in energy reaching the earth 'would lead to an unstable condition in which continental snow cover would advance to the Equator... [and] the oceans would eventually freeze,' according to a recent U.S. scientific advisory report. [WMC: nb: ellipsis original].

 

[konradv]

No wonder you don't understand AGW, if you want to argue this point. The sun DOES NOT rise as everyone knows, so it's obvious your position on the board isn't to provide facts, but to obscure them.

 

[daveman]

No wonder you don't understand AGW, if you want to argue this point. The sun DOES NOT rise as everyone knows, so it's obvious your position on the board isn't to provide facts, but to obscure them.

You don't know shit about relativity, do you?

Relative to a person standing on the surface of the earth, the sun does indeed rise.

And believe me, I understand AGW. It's a political and economic belief with political and economic goals. The science is just a beard, and a poorly-constructed one at that.

 

[IanC]

What cooling period????????

There was a FLAT period from the 1940s to the 1970s between two WARMING periods but there has NEVER been a COOLING period in the entire temperature history of direct instrument measurement.

What is this imaginary COOLING period you fantasize about?????

the period from about 1950-1980, the one that caused the New Ice Age Hoax. I can't help it that people like Hansen have massaged the data to the point that it doesn't look like a cooling period anymore.

Well, Ian, sorry to see that you are well into lying to support you point of view. For there never was a New Ice Age Hoax by scientists. One of the articles frequently quoted as stating that an ice age was coming is from the National Geographic. Here the paragraph from which the quotes are taken out of context, is presented in its entirety;

National Geographic, November 1976

So now, some example of people dishonestly quoting the article:

The New American says (V20 #21, Oct 2004) National Geographic now claims that the Earth is heating up at an alarming rate. But in 1976 the magazine worried that falling temperatures could lead to another ice age.

Mike Oliver, at "energytruth.com" says In November, 1976 the National Geographic carried a warning that "the oceans would eventually freeze" and "snow would advance to the equator".

Bob Foster, on the Lavoisier group website: Back in the 70s, the greater concern was the possibility of global cooling.

Whats amusing about this, is that he describes the article as "a measured account of thinking at the time", which it is (as well as you can expect from the non-science press): its just that the measure is not what he says it is.
Will that do? They aren't particularly notable but they indicate the kind of stuff you see. None of these quotes is actually untrue: the dishonesty lies in their implying that cooling was either the only prediction, or considered much more likely.

Lets take that second pair of quotes and put them into context. Which is page 582: left column: 2 pix, one of J Murray Mitchell, captioned: "Cooling trend of world climate was documented in the 1960's by J Murray Mitchell... Now, he notes, [CO2] pollution may be contributing to an opposite, or warming, tendency". The second is of Reid Bryson (looking particularly wacky) captioned: "'Human Volcano': Read A Bryson of the University of Wisconsin coined that phrase to describe how an exploding population has flung particulate matter, such as dust from cultivation, into the atmosphere. There it blocks solar rays, and surface temperatures drop. In the complex climate equation, this may be the critical factor, he believes." Right column is text "It is possible we are on the brink of a several-decade-long period of rapid warming...", with a text box in bold: "Were the cooling trend to reverse... the earth could warm relatively rapidly, with potentially catastrophic effect. National Science Foundation, 1975", then "The CO2 level is already up by 10% since 1850; by the year 2000, experts say, it may have risen another 20%, enough to cause a 0.6oC rise in average world temperature.". Then we get a new section, about whether particulates warm or cool. Then we get the quote: "But the sensitivity of climate was pointed up independently by a Soviet and an American scientist, who conclused that a permanent drop of only 1.6 to 2 percent in energy reaching the earth 'would lead to an unstable condition in which continental snow cover would advance to the Equator... [and] the oceans would eventually freeze,' according to a recent U.S. scientific advisory report. [WMC: nb: ellipsis original].

and the funny part of revisionist history is that it repeats itself. 25 years from now there is a good chance that people like you will be quoting Lindzen to prove that there was no consensus on global warming, that while there were some that made catastrophic claims most scientists were saying that it was just a natural ebb and flow of temperature change.

I wish I could remember where that Scientific American temperature data graph was posted. It was made by a reputable scientist from reputable data and it showed a definite cooling period. but somehow the the data and the shape of the graph has morphed into what the alarmists want to show us. straight out of Orwel's 1984. the memory hole has been worked overtime lately.

 

[edthecynic]

in much the same way as most of the years in the 30's were the warmest ever. would we be as concerned about the temperatures as much as we are if the thermometer hadnt been invented in the Little Ice Age, or the satellites hadnt gone up at the end of a cooling period?

What cooling period????????

There was a FLAT period from the 1940s to the 1970s between two WARMING periods but there has NEVER been a COOLING period in the entire temperature history of direct instrument measurement.

What is this imaginary COOLING period you fantasize about?????

the period from about 1950-1980, the one that caused the New Ice Age Hoax. I can't help it that people like Hansen have massaged the data to the point that it doesn't look like a cooling period anymore.

There was no cooling during the denier's "New Ice Age Hoax" and your "massaged" data is as imaginary as your cooling period.
Try again.

 

[IanC]

 

[RDD_1210]

So wait, let me get this straight. You post an article stating that 2010 is THE hottest year on record AND that 9 of the last 10 years were also the hottest years and somehow you think this is proving that Global warming isn't a problem? Do I have that right? What am I missing here?

Shouldn't you be advocating then that we aren't doing enough to combat this problem?