Satellite data: NO WARMING IN 21 YEARS!!!!!

[CrusaderFrank]

The entire concept that there's a true average temperature for a planet is as meaningless as it is stupid.

Earth has a RANGE of temperature, it varies within the range.

Had the AGWCult even once been able to post an experiment showing a wisp of CO2 raising temperature, I might listen. But the whole enterprise is a sham to redistribute wealth

 

[mamooth]

You were corrected on MANY of these lies a couple days ago

Oh my. Someone has delusions of adequacy.

And some of your excuses are so juvenile -- you ought to be embarrassed. "Humidity levels"???

A minor mistake in an offhand comment, one I can happily admit to. Secure people have no problem admitting mistakes.

In contrast, you ought to be embarrassed for getting sucked into a liars' cult, and for willingly repeating their conspiracy cult lies years after they've been debunked. I know the refusal to admit any error, no matter how small, is a defining characteristic of deniers, but given how all the data keeps piling up against you, you won't be able to avoid it forever. And it's not going to get any better for you. The longer you wait to admit you let your political cult play you for a Useful Idiot, the more painful the admission will be.

Showed you the response of "lower trop satellite" WAAY below 5000ft.

That's nice. However, Goddard and WUWT and most of the deniers like to use the 14,000 foot measurements. If you think it's bad, then tell your side to stop doing it. You won't, of course, as a good cultist never criticizes a fellow cultist.

And NO MAN-DIRECTED network

But a man-directed satellite processing is fine? You're racking up the double standards. Or maybe you're under the very strange impression that the satellite processing isn't man-directed. If you're that clueless about the basics, you shouldn't be in the discussion.

of 100,000 thermometers RANDOMLY placed on the globe is EVER gonna equal the REPEATABLE and consistent orbiting of a satellite.

Because you say so? I guess the world has to change now. The issue is settled.

There are simple drift corrections, some diurnal sampling adjustments, but they are NOTHING like the constant meat factory of "expert opinion" analysts making UNSPECIFIED and UNTRACKABLE adjustments to the temperature in 1941.. TODAY -- they are STILL monkeying with 1941...

No denier has show even a single unjustified adjustment. That conspiracy theory is shameful crap.

Here's the crux of the matter, which is going to make you turn and run. After all, it always makes all the deniers run. No denier has the guts or honesty to face the actual issue.

The surface temperature adjustments make the warming look _smaller_. Therefore, the denier conspiracy theory is a big steaming pile, one that only the pathologically dishonest will try to push.

If you're claiming it's not dishonest bullshit, explain why the scientists are adjusting the surface temperature to make the warming look smaller. How does that fit in with the grand conspiracy theory? Scientists could just leave the raw data untouched to show more warming. If your theory says their goal is to show more warming, then why do they adjust the data to make it look cooler?

Funny you have an issue with using a WELL known and WELL behaved reflection off an Oxygen molecule to measure temperatur

No, I don't. Don't make up weird stories about me.

--- YET --- You have NO issue with using TREE RINGS as thermometers, or Snail Shells as thermometers to make sweeping ass statements about temperature 10,000 years ago..

Keep going with those strawmen. After all, it's not like you actually want to learn just how convoluted the satellite processing is.

You're used up cat. I ignore you best I can.. But this desperate mangling of the truth just burns me..

If you're like the other deniers, you'll use that "declare victory and run" tactic now, so that you don't have to explain why you keep deliberately pushing such a flagrantly dishonest conspiracy theory.

 

[jc456]

You were corrected on MANY of these lies a couple days ago

Oh my. Someone has delusions of adequacy.

And some of your excuses are so juvenile -- you ought to be embarrassed. "Humidity levels"???

A minor mistake in an offhand comment, one I can happily admit to. Secure people have no problem admitting mistakes.

In contrast, you ought to be embarrassed for getting sucked into a liars' cult, and for willingly repeating their conspiracy cult lies years after they've been debunked. I know the refusal to admit any error, no matter how small, is a defining characteristic of deniers, but given how all the data keeps piling up against you, you won't be able to avoid it forever. And it's not going to get any better for you. The longer you wait to admit you let your political cult play you for a Useful Idiot, the more painful the admission will be.

Showed you the response of "lower trop satellite" WAAY below 5000ft.

That's nice. However, Goddard and WUWT and most of the deniers like to use the 14,000 foot measurements. If you think it's bad, then tell your side to stop doing it. You won't, of course, as a good cultist never criticizes a fellow cultist.

And NO MAN-DIRECTED network

But a man-directed satellite processing is fine? You're racking up the double standards. Or maybe you're under the very strange impression that the satellite processing isn't man-directed. If you're that clueless about the basics, you shouldn't be in the discussion.

of 100,000 thermometers RANDOMLY placed on the globe is EVER gonna equal the REPEATABLE and consistent orbiting of a satellite.

Because you say so? I guess the world has to change now. The issue is settled.

There are simple drift corrections, some diurnal sampling adjustments, but they are NOTHING like the constant meat factory of "expert opinion" analysts making UNSPECIFIED and UNTRACKABLE adjustments to the temperature in 1941.. TODAY -- they are STILL monkeying with 1941...

No denier has show even a single unjustified adjustment. That conspiracy theory is shameful crap.

Here's the crux of the matter, which is going to make you turn and run. After all, it always makes all the deniers run. No denier has the guts or honesty to face the actual issue.

The surface temperature adjustments make the warming look _smaller_. Therefore, the denier conspiracy theory is a big steaming pile, one that only the pathologically dishonest will try to push.

If you're claiming it's not dishonest bullshit, explain why the scientists are adjusting the surface temperature to make the warming look smaller. How does that fit in with the grand conspiracy theory? Scientists could just leave the raw data untouched to show more warming. If your theory says their goal is to show more warming, then why do they adjust the data to make it look cooler?

Funny you have an issue with using a WELL known and WELL behaved reflection off an Oxygen molecule to measure temperatur

No, I don't. Don't make up weird stories about me.

--- YET --- You have NO issue with using TREE RINGS as thermometers, or Snail Shells as thermometers to make sweeping ass statements about temperature 10,000 years ago..

Keep going with those strawmen. After all, it's not like you actually want to learn just how convoluted the satellite processing is.

You're used up cat. I ignore you best I can.. But this desperate mangling of the truth just burns me..

If you're like the other deniers, you'll use that "declare victory and run" tactic now, so that you don't have to explain why you keep deliberately pushing such a flagrantly dishonest conspiracy theory.

So you got that information on what 10 PPM of CO2 does to climate or temperatures? haven't seen that one yet. You post quite a bit of nonsense, and yet when queried for facts, can't produce. Must suck not being able to produce.

 

[flacaltenn]

You were corrected on MANY of these lies a couple days ago

Oh my. Someone has delusions of adequacy.

And some of your excuses are so juvenile -- you ought to be embarrassed. "Humidity levels"???

A minor mistake in an offhand comment, one I can happily admit to. Secure people have no problem admitting mistakes.

In contrast, you ought to be embarrassed for getting sucked into a liars' cult, and for willingly repeating their conspiracy cult lies years after they've been debunked. I know the refusal to admit any error, no matter how small, is a defining characteristic of deniers, but given how all the data keeps piling up against you, you won't be able to avoid it forever. And it's not going to get any better for you. The longer you wait to admit you let your political cult play you for a Useful Idiot, the more painful the admission will be.

Showed you the response of "lower trop satellite" WAAY below 5000ft.

That's nice. However, Goddard and WUWT and most of the deniers like to use the 14,000 foot measurements. If you think it's bad, then tell your side to stop doing it. You won't, of course, as a good cultist never criticizes a fellow cultist.

And NO MAN-DIRECTED network

But a man-directed satellite processing is fine? You're racking up the double standards. Or maybe you're under the very strange impression that the satellite processing isn't man-directed. If you're that clueless about the basics, you shouldn't be in the discussion.

of 100,000 thermometers RANDOMLY placed on the globe is EVER gonna equal the REPEATABLE and consistent orbiting of a satellite.

Because you say so? I guess the world has to change now. The issue is settled.

There are simple drift corrections, some diurnal sampling adjustments, but they are NOTHING like the constant meat factory of "expert opinion" analysts making UNSPECIFIED and UNTRACKABLE adjustments to the temperature in 1941.. TODAY -- they are STILL monkeying with 1941...

No denier has show even a single unjustified adjustment. That conspiracy theory is shameful crap.

Here's the crux of the matter, which is going to make you turn and run. After all, it always makes all the deniers run. No denier has the guts or honesty to face the actual issue.

The surface temperature adjustments make the warming look _smaller_. Therefore, the denier conspiracy theory is a big steaming pile, one that only the pathologically dishonest will try to push.

If you're claiming it's not dishonest bullshit, explain why the scientists are adjusting the surface temperature to make the warming look smaller. How does that fit in with the grand conspiracy theory? Scientists could just leave the raw data untouched to show more warming. If your theory says their goal is to show more warming, then why do they adjust the data to make it look cooler?

Funny you have an issue with using a WELL known and WELL behaved reflection off an Oxygen molecule to measure temperatur

No, I don't. Don't make up weird stories about me.

--- YET --- You have NO issue with using TREE RINGS as thermometers, or Snail Shells as thermometers to make sweeping ass statements about temperature 10,000 years ago..

Keep going with those strawmen. After all, it's not like you actually want to learn just how convoluted the satellite processing is.

You're used up cat. I ignore you best I can.. But this desperate mangling of the truth just burns me..

If you're like the other deniers, you'll use that "declare victory and run" tactic now, so that you don't have to explain why you keep deliberately pushing such a flagrantly dishonest conspiracy theory.

For a cat that hangs out here for so many 100s of hours -- you've not learned much..

""No denier has show even a single unjustified adjustment. That conspiracy theory is shameful crap.""

Seems to me you were in a thread in last week discussing the secret and proprietary nature of the Govt Temperature group in Australia. Yet you don't remember that one of their excuses was that POINT BY BY POINT, a LOT of decisions are made on "expert judgement". So if they need to cover the Downslope of mountain range with NO measurements, over DIFFERENT altitudes and weather zones, it's full of "personal judgement"??

Sounds to me that it's exactly like counting chad in Florida..... Different results every time it's done. Tired of warmer zealots complaining that they've never heard or seen things that passed thru their ears just last week..

 

[mamooth]

Seems to me you were in a thread in last week discussing the secret and proprietary nature of the Govt Temperature group in Australia.

Yeah, the JoNova fraud that you fell hard for. Were you actually under the impression that you made some kind of point? Interesting, the way you filter reality. That's the problem with relying entirely on crank cult websites for your information.

So, deflection noted, back to the topic. Overall surface temperature adjustments make the warming look smaller. That means the primary denier conspiracy theory is debunked and dishonest. Are you still going to keep pushing it?

 

[jc456]

Seems to me you were in a thread in last week discussing the secret and proprietary nature of the Govt Temperature group in Australia.

Yeah, the JoNova fraud that you fell hard for. Were you actually under the impression that you made some kind of point? Interesting, the way you filter reality. That's the problem with relying entirely on crank cult websites for your information.

So, deflection noted, back to the topic. Overall surface temperature adjustments make the warming look smaller. That means the primary denier conspiracy theory is debunked and dishonest. Are you still going to keep pushing it?

So you agree that temperature data is manipulated?

 

[flacaltenn]

Seems to me you were in a thread in last week discussing the secret and proprietary nature of the Govt Temperature group in Australia.

Yeah, the JoNova fraud that you fell hard for. Were you actually under the impression that you made some kind of point? Interesting, the way you filter reality. That's the problem with relying entirely on crank cult websites for your information.

So, deflection noted, back to the topic. Overall surface temperature adjustments make the warming look smaller. That means the primary denier conspiracy theory is debunked and dishonest. Are you still going to keep pushing it?

Should pass on this flailing attempt to regain any cred.. But just want to point out -- the DEBATE over the PROCESS in Australia of preparing the data is NOT "a JoAnne NOva deal".. It's out in the open press. You know that. Anybody can verify that..

Blogs are valuable. They do the service that librarians USED to do. They don't pretend to TELL you the information, they just show you where to find it..

 

[mamooth]

The fact that nobody outside the denier cult pays it any attention proves the conspiracy to cover it up, of course. Standard conspiracy cult stuff.

 

[skookerasbil]

The fact that nobody outside the denier cult pays it any attention proves the conspiracy to cover it up, of course. Standard conspiracy cult stuff.

dang s0n.....you must have a plate in your head.

"denier cult"..........what does that mean? "conspiracy cult" automatically suggests something fringe.

Indeed.......watching your posts, one would think that an overwhelming number of people buy into climate alarmism!!! Like a majority........

So.....if that is so, where is the science mattering in the real world? The "denier cult" would like you to display some links please!!

And if the "denier conspiracy cult" is so marginal, then why are there about 5 polls just like this one?? >>>

[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/pew-report-climate-change.jpg.html][/URL]



Kinda makes you look pretty fucking dumb........in fact, that # down there on the bottom would clearly suggest that your contingent is the "cult" sweetie!!!

You know that they say..........numbers don't lie.


AGW k00ks do though.............

 

[Billy_Bob]

You were corrected on MANY of these lies a couple days ago

Oh my. Someone has delusions of adequacy.

And some of your excuses are so juvenile -- you ought to be embarrassed. "Humidity levels"???

A minor mistake in an offhand comment, one I can happily admit to. Secure people have no problem admitting mistakes.

In contrast, you ought to be embarrassed for getting sucked into a liars' cult, and for willingly repeating their conspiracy cult lies years after they've been debunked. I know the refusal to admit any error, no matter how small, is a defining characteristic of deniers, but given how all the data keeps piling up against you, you won't be able to avoid it forever. And it's not going to get any better for you. The longer you wait to admit you let your political cult play you for a Useful Idiot, the more painful the admission will be.

Showed you the response of "lower trop satellite" WAAY below 5000ft.

That's nice. However, Goddard and WUWT and most of the deniers like to use the 14,000 foot measurements. If you think it's bad, then tell your side to stop doing it. You won't, of course, as a good cultist never criticizes a fellow cultist.

And NO MAN-DIRECTED network

But a man-directed satellite processing is fine? You're racking up the double standards. Or maybe you're under the very strange impression that the satellite processing isn't man-directed. If you're that clueless about the basics, you shouldn't be in the discussion.

of 100,000 thermometers RANDOMLY placed on the globe is EVER gonna equal the REPEATABLE and consistent orbiting of a satellite.

Because you say so? I guess the world has to change now. The issue is settled.

There are simple drift corrections, some diurnal sampling adjustments, but they are NOTHING like the constant meat factory of "expert opinion" analysts making UNSPECIFIED and UNTRACKABLE adjustments to the temperature in 1941.. TODAY -- they are STILL monkeying with 1941...

No denier has show even a single unjustified adjustment. That conspiracy theory is shameful crap.

Here's the crux of the matter, which is going to make you turn and run. After all, it always makes all the deniers run. No denier has the guts or honesty to face the actual issue.

The surface temperature adjustments make the warming look _smaller_. Therefore, the denier conspiracy theory is a big steaming pile, one that only the pathologically dishonest will try to push.

If you're claiming it's not dishonest bullshit, explain why the scientists are adjusting the surface temperature to make the warming look smaller. How does that fit in with the grand conspiracy theory? Scientists could just leave the raw data untouched to show more warming. If your theory says their goal is to show more warming, then why do they adjust the data to make it look cooler?

Funny you have an issue with using a WELL known and WELL behaved reflection off an Oxygen molecule to measure temperatur

No, I don't. Don't make up weird stories about me.

--- YET --- You have NO issue with using TREE RINGS as thermometers, or Snail Shells as thermometers to make sweeping ass statements about temperature 10,000 years ago..

Keep going with those strawmen. After all, it's not like you actually want to learn just how convoluted the satellite processing is.

You're used up cat. I ignore you best I can.. But this desperate mangling of the truth just burns me..

If you're like the other deniers, you'll use that "declare victory and run" tactic now, so that you don't have to explain why you keep deliberately pushing such a flagrantly dishonest conspiracy theory.

Dishonesty is the liberal fucktards like you who claim that all of the 0.47 deg C warming over the last 75 years is all man made.

Please enlighten us as to how YOU single handedly stopped NATURAL VARIATION and how you determined that all warming was MAN CAUSED?

Post up your proof there fucktard hairball..