Satellite Temperature Data Errors Revealed

[jc456]

Frank and Mr. Right apparently couldn't follow the link in the Guardian article back to the original paper.

But then, it's not like they're allowed to look at sources that the cult hasn't approved. They didn't even look at the Guardian article, much less the paper itself.

Removing Diurnal Cycle Contamination in Satellite-Derived Tropospheric Temperatures: Understanding Tropical Tropospheric Trend Discrepancies
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Thats what deniers do.

What is it you do exactly as a denier?

 

[jc456]

T

And this would be why the fabrication is being pushed..

RSS Shows No Warming For 15 Years

The pause has now exceeded 15 years in three data sets...

There has been no cooling for 100 years.

No need to fabricate anything.

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

they work hard to ignore facts

 

[jc456]

Mr.Right would defund all the data sets and then demand everyone to go pray to Jesus Christ.

What I'd do is defund and replace with the real data sets. Work for you? Don't need Jesus to do that you need the devil to push off junk as facts!

 

[Old Rocks]

And you get to determine the real data sets, correct? LOL. You don't even know basic science, let alone what goes into making an accurate data set.

 

[Billy_Bob]

T

And this would be why the fabrication is being pushed..

RSS Shows No Warming For 15 Years

The pause has now exceeded 15 years in three data sets...

There has been no cooling for 100 years.

No need to fabricate anything.

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

they work hard to ignore facts

They act like warming has never happened ed before

 

[edthecynic]

And this would be why the fabrication is being pushed..

RSS Shows No Warming For 15 Years

The pause has now exceeded 15 years in three data sets...

There has been no cooling for 100 years.

No need to fabricate anything.

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

we came out of an Ice Age 12,000 years ago.

 

[edthecynic]

T

There has been no cooling for 100 years.

No need to fabricate anything.

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

they work hard to ignore facts

View attachment 39463
They act like warming has never happened ed before

Those are proxy estimates, no way near as accurate as the direct instrument measurements we have now.

 

[Crick]

What did Mamooth say? By denier logic, humans cannot cause forest fires.

 

[ScienceRocks]

T

There has been no cooling for 100 years.

No need to fabricate anything.

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

they work hard to ignore facts

View attachment 39463
They act like warming has never happened ed before

You got to remember most of the pixies and temperature records at the time of these studies where northern North America and Europe. This is no where near global...A global study was done that shows that it was much cooler then today 1000 years ago.

 

[Crick]

T

There has been no cooling for 100 years.

No need to fabricate anything.

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

they work hard to ignore facts

View attachment 39463
They act like warming has never happened ed before

Who do you believe is acting as if warming has never happened before?

 

[skookerasbil]

T

There has been no cooling for 100 years.

No need to fabricate anything.

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

they work hard to ignore facts

View attachment 39463
They act like warming has never happened ed before

MWP pwns them. That simple. Most people just don't know about it. It they did, these stoopid windmills could go away not to mention the mega-expensive solar disaster that nobody is buying.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

T

LOL...

There have been durations if increase and durations of decrease in the last 100 years. Disingenuous, you are..

there have only been significant increases over the last 100 years, NO significant cooling. You get sharp warming followed by a flat period and then another sharp warming period. We are now in our second flat period which will be followed by our third period of sharp warming I predict.

Could it be because we are coming out of an ice age? Also, temperatures have been several degrees warmer in the past.

they work hard to ignore facts

View attachment 39463
They act like warming has never happened ed before

MWP pwns them. That simple. Most people just don't know about it. It they did, these stoopid windmills could go away not to mention the mega-expensive solar disaster that nobody is buying.

But once you use Mann's Natures Trick the MWP becomes an optical illusion

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Denier" and "Consensus" are Cultists words

 

[Crick]

DENIER, in this context, refers to those who deny anthropogenic global warming, despite the overwhelming CONSENSUS among active climate scientists and scientists in general that it is a valid description of the current behavior of the Earth's climate sytem.

Cult:
1.
a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.
an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.
the object of such devotion.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6.
a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members
often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7.
the members of such a religion or sect.

Given these definitions for cult, Frank, please explain how you understand the terms denier and consensus to be "cultish".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

DENIER, in this context, refers to those who deny anthropogenic global warming, despite the overwhelming CONSENSUS among active climate scientists and scientists in general that it is a valid description of the current behavior of the Earth's climate sytem.

Cult:
1.
a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.
an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.
the object of such devotion.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6.
a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members
often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7.
the members of such a religion or sect.

Given these definitions for cult, Frank, please explain how you understand the terms denier and consensus to be "cultish".

Denier is a cult word used to denigrate "nonbelievers" who dare to question the sacred properties of the CO2 molecule

 

[skookerasbil]

DENIER, in this context, refers to those who deny anthropogenic global warming, despite the overwhelming CONSENSUS among active climate scientists and scientists in general that it is a valid description of the current behavior of the Earth's climate sytem.

Cult:
1.
a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.
an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.
the object of such devotion.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6.
a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members
often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7.
the members of such a religion or sect.

Given these definitions for cult, Frank, please explain how you understand the terms denier and consensus to be "cultish".

So ummm........got a little question s0n.............

If climate skeptics are such a "cult", why has there been ZERO climate legislation in the US in the past 7 years? Why is renewable energy still such a joke if there is such an enormous consensus on climate change? Why does every poll say that global warming is at the bottom of the list for American concerns?

Well......I'll tell you why!!!

Because actually, the AGW community is a cult. What I have referenced above is the proof. "Climate change" and its supposed disasterous effects........embraced by relatively few = fringe = cult.


More Proof the skeptics are WINNING US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum



Far, far more scientists think AGW is total crap.

In 2015, lets face it.....climate alarmism is all but dead. Its alive on internet message boards.......but nowhere else.




The only subject on this message board that is more silly than AGW is the gun grabber fantasies. You look at their posts/threads and you'd think America was on the precipice of banning guns!!! But like the AGW climate crusaders, they might as well be standing stark naked on the top of a Himilayan mountain screaming "FIRE!!". Nobody is caring.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

DENIER, in this context, refers to those who deny anthropogenic global warming, despite the overwhelming CONSENSUS among active climate scientists and scientists in general that it is a valid description of the current behavior of the Earth's climate sytem.

Cult:
1.
a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.
an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.
the object of such devotion.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6.
a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members
often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7.
the members of such a religion or sect.

Given these definitions for cult, Frank, please explain how you understand the terms denier and consensus to be "cultish".

Again, and as Crick was so kind to highlight, neither denier nor cult are terms of science, but are only used by Cults

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Newton's Theory of Gravity had a 99+% Consensus factor thereby making Einstein a Gravity Denier

 

[Crick]

You cannot use the word cult to define the word cult. I just had a visit from the Jehovah's Witnesses this morning and their flyer claimed that we should believe the Bible because in the Bible, God tells us that all scripture is inspired of God. D'ye see the problem laddie?

 

[Crick]

DENIER, in this context, refers to those who deny anthropogenic global warming, despite the overwhelming CONSENSUS among active climate scientists and scientists in general that it is a valid description of the current behavior of the Earth's climate sytem.

Cult:
1.
a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2.
an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3.
the object of such devotion.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6.
a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members
often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7.
the members of such a religion or sect.

Given these definitions for cult, Frank, please explain how you understand the terms denier and consensus to be "cultish".

Denier is a cult word used to denigrate "nonbelievers" who dare to question the sacred properties of the CO2 molecule

It is a descriptive term - the common thread amongst you all is that you deny what the experts accept. Sanctity is not involved.

Again, and as Crick was so kind to highlight, neither denier nor cult are terms of science, but are only used by Cults

Though they are unlikely to be used by anyone outside of sociology, I made no such contention. This would be another of your failures to comprehend the written word.

Newton's Theory of Gravity had a 99+% Consensus factor thereby making Einstein a Gravity Denier

Save for one minor point. Relativity does not refute Newtonian gravity.