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.
And Chris is merely countering what deniers have been doing for decades. Remember how the deniers claimed that 1998 was not the warmest year GLOBALLY because 1934 was the warmest year in the USA?????I do find it kind of amazing that people sincerely believe that we can debate the significance of some temperature somewhere on the planet, and from that miniscule bit of data draw a scientific conclusion about the state of the entire planet.
Are people really as stupid as their posts seem to indicate?
I mean it is one thing to debate whether or not global warming is happening.
That I can understand.
But to imagine that any single weather event is going to prove something about that debate?
That's just silly.
westwall is merely countering what Chris does on a daily basis.
Let me see if I have this straight. The same warming people who are falsifying temps to show warming are now reporting record cold temps. Why wouldn't they falsify cold temps to be warmer too???????? If they will tell the truth about record cold temps, why wouldn't they tell the truth about warm temps????Yes you read it correctly. In this year of "record" heat (thanks to the miracles of modern data falsification) there is one thing you can't fib about...because the people really are freezing their collective butts off! So here you have it, the coldest recorded temps in over a century in many cases.
Thanksgiving cold breaks records across Calif
Obviously you are projecting the dishonest behavior of deniers!!!
Not a position just an observation.
When the AGW crowd gets in power the US cools.
When the anti-AGW gets in power the US warms.
After 2013 there will in all likelihood be heatwaves. Its just Murphy's law.
I do find it kind of amazing that people sincerely believe that we can debate the significance of some temperature somewhere on the planet, and from that miniscule bit of data draw a scientific conclusion about the state of the entire planet.
Are people really as stupid as their posts seem to indicate?
I mean it is one thing to debate whether or not global warming is happening.
That I can understand.
But to imagine that any single weather event is going to prove something about that debate?
That's just silly.
And Chris is merely countering what deniers have been doing for decades. Remember how the deniers claimed that 1998 was not the warmest year GLOBALLY because 1934 was the warmest year in the USA?????I do find it kind of amazing that people sincerely believe that we can debate the significance of some temperature somewhere on the planet, and from that miniscule bit of data draw a scientific conclusion about the state of the entire planet.
Are people really as stupid as their posts seem to indicate?
I mean it is one thing to debate whether or not global warming is happening.
That I can understand.
But to imagine that any single weather event is going to prove something about that debate?
That's just silly.
westwall is merely countering what Chris does on a daily basis.
Front-Line City in Virginia Tackles Rise in Sea
*snip*
As sea levels rise, tidal flooding is increasingly disrupting life here and all along the East Coast, a development many climate scientists link to global warming.
But Norfolk is worse off. Situated just west of the mouth of Chesapeake Bay, it is bordered on three sides by water, including several rivers, like the Lafayette, that are actually long tidal streams that feed into the bay and eventually the ocean.
*snip*
Climate change is a subject of friction in Virginia. The states attorney general, Ken T. Cuccinelli II, is trying to prove that a prominent climate scientist engaged in fraud when he was a researcher at the University of Virginia. But the residents of coastal neighborhoods here are less interested in the debate than in the real-time consequences of a rise in sea level.
When Ms. Peck, now 75 and a caretaker to her husband, moved here 40 years ago, tidal flooding was an occasional hazard.
Last month, she said recently, there were eight or nine days the tide was so doggone high it was difficult to drive.
*snip*
If sea level is a constant, your coastal infrastructure is your most valuable real estate, and it makes sense to invest in it, Mr. Stiles said, but with sea level rising, it becomes a money pit.
Many Norfolk residents hope their problems will serve as a warning.
We are the front lines of climate change, said Jim Schultz, a science and technology writer who lives on Richmond Crescent near Ms. Peck. No one who has a house here is a skeptic.
Well to be more exact westwall building in or on the edge of a tidal or flood plain makes the problem worse. Also sea traffic and Norfolk has had both of those problems going back to at least the war of independence. I don't doubt that the Norfolk peninsula is shrinking much faster than Boston because bedrock is a whole lot lower in Norfolk put heavy buildings on sand and the sand spreads. The wake of ships and barges speeds up the removal of the sand. I don't know whether the sea level is rising, falling or whatever but for a Norfolk observer the sea level is rising fast. The same thing has happened in New Orleans over the centuries which is why it is below sea level.
Front-Line City in Virginia Tackles Rise in Sea
*snip*
As sea levels rise, tidal flooding is increasingly disrupting life here and all along the East Coast, a development many climate scientists link to global warming.
But Norfolk is worse off. Situated just west of the mouth of Chesapeake Bay, it is bordered on three sides by water, including several rivers, like the Lafayette, that are actually long tidal streams that feed into the bay and eventually the ocean.
*snip*
Climate change is a subject of friction in Virginia. The states attorney general, Ken T. Cuccinelli II, is trying to prove that a prominent climate scientist engaged in fraud when he was a researcher at the University of Virginia. But the residents of coastal neighborhoods here are less interested in the debate than in the real-time consequences of a rise in sea level.
When Ms. Peck, now 75 and a caretaker to her husband, moved here 40 years ago, tidal flooding was an occasional hazard.
Last month, she said recently, there were eight or nine days the tide was so doggone high it was difficult to drive.
*snip*
If sea level is a constant, your coastal infrastructure is your most valuable real estate, and it makes sense to invest in it, Mr. Stiles said, but with sea level rising, it becomes a money pit.
Many Norfolk residents hope their problems will serve as a warning.
We are the front lines of climate change, said Jim Schultz, a science and technology writer who lives on Richmond Crescent near Ms. Peck. No one who has a house here is a skeptic.
Thermometers are the same in the US as they are in Kenya, or anywhere else they are in the world. A thermometer is one of the easiest devices to make and calibrate. Put it in a glass of ice water and you mark the 32 degrees F and 0 degrees C point. Put it in boiling water and you have the 212 degree F and 100 degree C point. Then just add the proper number of equally spaced in between points. Presto, you have an accurate thermometer.And Chris is merely countering what deniers have been doing for decades. Remember how the deniers claimed that 1998 was not the warmest year GLOBALLY because 1934 was the warmest year in the USA?????westwall is merely countering what Chris does on a daily basis.
How many weather stations were there worldwide in 1934? Would you think that weather stations in the US are more likely to be accurate than stations in Kenya? Would you think it would have been more likely in 1934?
Thermometers are the same in the US as they are in Kenya, or anywhere else they are in the world. A thermometer is one of the easiest devices to make and calibrate. Put it in a glass of ice water and you mark the 32 degrees F and 0 degrees C point. Put it in boiling water and you have the 212 degree F and 100 degree C point. Then just add the proper number of equally spaced in between points. Presto, you have an accurate thermometer.And Chris is merely countering what deniers have been doing for decades. Remember how the deniers claimed that 1998 was not the warmest year GLOBALLY because 1934 was the warmest year in the USA?????
How many weather stations were there worldwide in 1934? Would you think that weather stations in the US are more likely to be accurate than stations in Kenya? Would you think it would have been more likely in 1934?
Today we use satellites that cover nearly the entire globe. And the only part of Africa that is not covered by ground stations today is the Sahara.Thermometers are the same in the US as they are in Kenya, or anywhere else they are in the world. A thermometer is one of the easiest devices to make and calibrate. Put it in a glass of ice water and you mark the 32 degrees F and 0 degrees C point. Put it in boiling water and you have the 212 degree F and 100 degree C point. Then just add the proper number of equally spaced in between points. Presto, you have an accurate thermometer.How many weather stations were there worldwide in 1934? Would you think that weather stations in the US are more likely to be accurate than stations in Kenya? Would you think it would have been more likely in 1934?
The point ed is that way back in 1934 there were very few thermometers anywhere in Africa no matter how easy they were to produce, even today the vast majority is not covered. If you look at a map of African Temp coverage the only areas covered are on the edges of the continent, 100 miles inland and it is almost completely unknown.
Today we use satellites that cover nearly the entire globe. And the only part of Africa that is not covered by ground stations today is the Sahara.Thermometers are the same in the US as they are in Kenya, or anywhere else they are in the world. A thermometer is one of the easiest devices to make and calibrate. Put it in a glass of ice water and you mark the 32 degrees F and 0 degrees C point. Put it in boiling water and you have the 212 degree F and 100 degree C point. Then just add the proper number of equally spaced in between points. Presto, you have an accurate thermometer.
The point ed is that way back in 1934 there were very few thermometers anywhere in Africa no matter how easy they were to produce, even today the vast majority is not covered. If you look at a map of African Temp coverage the only areas covered are on the edges of the continent, 100 miles inland and it is almost completely unknown.
What deniers do is reject any data that does not support cooling. If older global temps do not support cooling and older USA temps support cooling then deniers simply reject ALL non USA data and rationalize that only USA data is accurate. They did the same thing with satellite data. When deniers Christy and Spencer at UAH were cooking the satellite data to show cooling, only the UAH data was considered accurate even though all the other satellite monitoring groups showed warming. They were simply dismissed as "Liberal biased." Now that Christy and Spencer can no longer use the opposite sign to correct for diurnal satellite drift and even their data shows warming, ALL satellite data is suddenly inaccurate.
What real scientists do with the older global data is assign a GREATER margin of error to the older data.
Even assuming that the USA data is the only accurate data, it still shows an overall warming trend.
I'm curious where you got that misinformation. The only places the satellites don't cover well are the poles.Today we use satellites that cover nearly the entire globe. And the only part of Africa that is not covered by ground stations today is the Sahara.The point ed is that way back in 1934 there were very few thermometers anywhere in Africa no matter how easy they were to produce, even today the vast majority is not covered. If you look at a map of African Temp coverage the only areas covered are on the edges of the continent, 100 miles inland and it is almost completely unknown.
What deniers do is reject any data that does not support cooling. If older global temps do not support cooling and older USA temps support cooling then deniers simply reject ALL non USA data and rationalize that only USA data is accurate. They did the same thing with satellite data. When deniers Christy and Spencer at UAH were cooking the satellite data to show cooling, only the UAH data was considered accurate even though all the other satellite monitoring groups showed warming. They were simply dismissed as "Liberal biased." Now that Christy and Spencer can no longer use the opposite sign to correct for diurnal satellite drift and even their data shows warming, ALL satellite data is suddenly inaccurate.
What real scientists do with the older global data is assign a GREATER margin of error to the older data.
Even assuming that the USA data is the only accurate data, it still shows an overall warming trend.
And those satellites cover the northern hemisphere very well, sadly the coverage of the southern hemisphere is greatly lacking. Hence there is little satellite coverage of Africa.
