Temperture prediction graph..

[Wyatt earp]

Lol I stumbled on the graph looking for something else... Talk about fear mongering. Remind me when they can tell us what the weather is next Saturday...

You are a true moron, barefarts, ignorant, clueless, retarded and full of misinformation and bullshit.

In the real world inhabited by intelligent people.....

‘We can’t even predict the weather next week’–But weather is not climate
Grist
By Coby Beck
Nov 22, 2006
Denier myth: 'Scientists can’t even predict the weather next week, so why should we believe what some climate model tells us about 100 years from now?'

Answer: Climate and weather are very different things, and the level of predictability is comparably different.

Climate is defined as weather averaged over a period of time — generally around 30 years. This averaging smooths out the random and unpredictable behaviour of weather. Think of it as the difference between trying to predict the height of the fifth wave from now versus predicting the height of tomorrow’s high tide. The former is a challenge — to which your salty, wet sneakers will bear witness — but the latter is routine and reliable.

This is not to say it’s easy to predict climate changes. But seizing on meteorologists’ failures to cast doubt on a climate model’s 100-year projection is an argument of ignorance.

I found out where that graph came from... These guys took the extreme from NOAA

Global Warming Future Timeline | Technology | Singularity | 2020 | 2050 | 2100 | 2150 | 2200 | 21st century | 22nd century | 23rd century | Humanity | Predictions | Events

So the graph represents the very probably pretty accurate, science based forecasts of the professional climate scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, working with the best data available.

And your sneering denigration of that graph in your moronic OP, and your idiotic comparison of long range climate prediction and weather prediction (debunked in post #11) are both based on your severe retardation, utter ignorance and lack of education, and, of course, the massive brainwashing by anti-science fossil fuel industry propaganda, delivered to your little confused brain by Rush, FauxNews, Breitbart, and all of the other pushers of fraudulent rightwingnut propaganda and lies.

You didn't debunk anything I showed how foolish once again you and your ilk really are.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Micheal Mann only used tree ring samples from Siberia, but you obviously have no fuckin' idea how much empirical data can be gleaned from core samples from old trees.
It's almost as much as can be found in ice and rock cores, both of which have been vigorously pursued for the last 50 years.
Isotopic analysis of the carbon and oxygen contained in samples of ancient material can reveal exactly the temperature, CO2 and O2 concentrations, and many other things.
Educate yourself, or keep your trap shut, and be thought a fool, rather than open it and confirm the fact.

BTW proxys can't narrow the past temperure to the years, 10s of years or even to the 50th of years.

I suggest you educate yourself before even trying to take on me.... Because I will embarrass you...


And I come up with new ones all the time.....




.


.

.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Micheal Mann only used tree ring samples from Siberia, but you obviously have no fuckin' idea how much empirical data can be gleaned from core samples from old trees.
It's almost as much as can be found in ice and rock cores, both of which have been vigorously pursued for the last 50 years.
Isotopic analysis of the carbon and oxygen contained in samples of ancient material can reveal exactly the temperature, CO2 and O2 concentrations, and many other things.
Educate yourself, or keep your trap shut, and be thought a fool, rather than open it and confirm the fact.

Since you brought up other proxys I really want to know, what was the the earth's temperature between 200 BC to 100 BC?


I am looking for a trend for research on a book.

 

[Mousterian]

I can't wait for your book!
Do your own research, but stick to reputable sources for specific numbers like that.
Here's what I found in 30 seconds on Wikipedia.

 

[Toro]

Here's my prediction for this summer in Florida:

Fucking hot!

 

[skookerasbil]

Curious readers of this particular thread should ask themselves..........

If the AGW alarmists are so confident about their positions on this topic, why is it when they post, you invariably get these angry, miserable verbal tirades screaming at other members as being "retard"......"moron"......."lunatic"...........

Why would your head explode with every post if your position was irrefutable?

 

[miketx]

Widely scattered light, turning to dark in the evening.

 

[Old Rocks]

Micheal Mann only used tree ring samples from Siberia, but you obviously have no fuckin' idea how much empirical data can be gleaned from core samples from old trees.
It's almost as much as can be found in ice and rock cores, both of which have been vigorously pursued for the last 50 years.
Isotopic analysis of the carbon and oxygen contained in samples of ancient material can reveal exactly the temperature, CO2 and O2 concentrations, and many other things.
Educate yourself, or keep your trap shut, and be thought a fool, rather than open it and confirm the fact.

Since you brought up other proxys I really want to know, what was the the earth's temperature between 200 BC to 100 BC?


I am looking for a trend for research on a book.

Why re-invent the wheel. That research has been done. There are more than a dozen studies done since then, and they all confirm Mann's graph.

And Mann, et al, used far more than tree rings from Siberia. I really don't know why you deniers have to constantly lie.

Behind the Hockey Stick

To construct the hockey-stick plot, Mann, Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Malcolm K. Hughes of the University of Arizona analyzed paleoclimatic data sets such as those from tree rings, ice cores and coral, joining historical data with thermometer readings from the recent past. In 1998 they obtained a "reconstruction" of Northern Hemisphere temperatures going back 600 years; by the next year they had extended their analysis to the past 1,000 years. In 2003 Mann and Philip D. Jones of the University of East Anglia in England used a different method to extend results back 2,000 years.

What evidence is there for the hockey stick?

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperature reconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).

 

[Old Rocks]

Micheal Mann only used tree ring samples from Siberia, but you obviously have no fuckin' idea how much empirical data can be gleaned from core samples from old trees.
It's almost as much as can be found in ice and rock cores, both of which have been vigorously pursued for the last 50 years.
Isotopic analysis of the carbon and oxygen contained in samples of ancient material can reveal exactly the temperature, CO2 and O2 concentrations, and many other things.
Educate yourself, or keep your trap shut, and be thought a fool, rather than open it and confirm the fact.

BTW proxys can't narrow the past temperure to the years, 10s of years or even to the 50th of years.

I suggest you educate yourself before even trying to take on me.... Because I will embarrass you...


And I come up with new ones all the time.....




.


.

.

Oh my, another "Oh, I am so fucking smart" asshole.

No, you are not smart, you apparently don't even approach average, for you have failed to do minimal research on this. You and your ilk like to state that we are too small to affect the Earth's climate, yet a single celled organism completely changed the composition of the Earth's atmosphere.

 

[fncceo]

Not happening!

Summer vs Winter.

 

[fncceo]

I can't wait for your book!
Do your own research, but stick to reputable sources for specific numbers like that.
Here's what I found in 30 seconds on Wikipedia.

I've read that thermometers in the 1st Century CE were less accurate than those we use today.

 

[mamooth]

I've read that thermometers in the 1st Century CE were less accurate than those we use today.

I've read that you have to be a paste-eating imbecile to deny that good climate proxies of past temperatures exist. And I've observed that's correct, as only the most brainless cult parrots are willing to pretend otherwise, most likely because their cult told them to say such a stupid thing.

 

[fncceo]

I've read that thermometers in the 1st Century CE were less accurate than those we use today.

I've read that you have to be a paste-eating imbecile to deny that good climate proxies of past temperatures exist. And I've observed that's correct, as only the most brainless cult parrots are willing to pretend otherwise, most likely because their cult told them to say such a stupid thing.

 

[Billy_Bob]

The moronic OP was completely debunked in post #11.

Only denier cult retards disagree.

Stuck in libtard fantasy land.. It doesn't matter to you that natural variation is NEVER considered by your cult? You don't believe in science, you believe in fairy-tales..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Lol I stumbled on the graph looking for something else... Talk about fear mongering. Remind me when they can tell us what the weather is next Saturday...

When you consider all of the upward adjustments in the HCN that 0.6 Deg C rise is diminished to just 0.2 deg C. Why would you exaggerate THE TEMPERATURE RISE by 200%

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Micheal Mann only used tree ring samples from Siberia, but you obviously have no fuckin' idea how much empirical data can be gleaned from core samples from old trees.
It's almost as much as can be found in ice and rock cores, both of which have been vigorously pursued for the last 50 years.
Isotopic analysis of the carbon and oxygen contained in samples of ancient material can reveal exactly the temperature, CO2 and O2 concentrations, and many other things.
Educate yourself, or keep your trap shut, and be thought a fool, rather than open it and confirm the fact.

Since you brought up other proxys I really want to know, what was the the earth's temperature between 200 BC to 100 BC?


I am looking for a trend for research on a book.

Why re-invent the wheel. That research has been done. There are more than a dozen studies done since then, and they all confirm Mann's graph.

And Mann, et al, used far more than tree rings from Siberia. I really don't know why you deniers have to constantly lie.

Behind the Hockey Stick

To construct the hockey-stick plot, Mann, Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Malcolm K. Hughes of the University of Arizona analyzed paleoclimatic data sets such as those from tree rings, ice cores and coral, joining historical data with thermometer readings from the recent past. In 1998 they obtained a "reconstruction" of Northern Hemisphere temperatures going back 600 years; by the next year they had extended their analysis to the past 1,000 years. In 2003 Mann and Philip D. Jones of the University of East Anglia in England used a different method to extend results back 2,000 years.

What evidence is there for the hockey stick?

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperature reconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).

He didn't win his Nobel Prize for nothing, eh?

 

[Billy_Bob]

duh....the bozo's cant even interpret a satellite image that shows that in the past year, the cold has moved south ( see ALL the white ). This is a regular occurrence btw......has happened several times since 1950.

These people......the religion..........how do you end up being such a sucker in life?



The suckers don't want you to know about THIS>>> The December 2015 North Pole Warming Event and the Increasing Occurrence of Such Events : Scientific Reports


The cold moves south assholes!!!

Isn't natural variation grand..

Repeats itself over and over again. But the Moron alarmist's ignore that EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE..

 

[Old Rocks]

Not happening!

Summer vs Winter.

My goodness, exceeding Silly Billy's brain dead idiocy. LOL

 

[skookerasbil]

nobody takes these temperature prediction models seriously in 2017 except the global warming radicals.......I mean c'mon now!

You talk to people here on Long Island who grew up going to the ocean every single weekend day for decades and now, many weekends you cant go because the temperature at the shore is only around 80 degree's. Talk about global warming and the laughter that follows has become the standard joke.

The alarmist think people sit home checking out the lastest research from Boner, Deuche and Bumpy on temperature readings from a rooftop near a heater in Scratchmyassville, Greenland.

duh........people freeze their asses off in most places in America from October to May.......nobody is caring about this stuff.

 

[RollingThunder]

Lol I stumbled on the graph looking for something else... Talk about fear mongering. Remind me when they can tell us what the weather is next Saturday...

You are a true moron, barefarts, ignorant, clueless, retarded and full of misinformation and bullshit.

In the real world inhabited by intelligent people.....

‘We can’t even predict the weather next week’–But weather is not climate
Grist
By Coby Beck
Nov 22, 2006
Denier myth: 'Scientists can’t even predict the weather next week, so why should we believe what some climate model tells us about 100 years from now?'

Answer: Climate and weather are very different things, and the level of predictability is comparably different.

Climate is defined as weather averaged over a period of time — generally around 30 years. This averaging smooths out the random and unpredictable behaviour of weather. Think of it as the difference between trying to predict the height of the fifth wave from now versus predicting the height of tomorrow’s high tide. The former is a challenge — to which your salty, wet sneakers will bear witness — but the latter is routine and reliable.

This is not to say it’s easy to predict climate changes. But seizing on meteorologists’ failures to cast doubt on a climate model’s 100-year projection is an argument of ignorance.

I found out where that graph came from... These guys took the extreme from NOAA

Global Warming Future Timeline | Technology | Singularity | 2020 | 2050 | 2100 | 2150 | 2200 | 21st century | 22nd century | 23rd century | Humanity | Predictions | Events

So the graph represents the very probably pretty accurate, science based forecasts of the professional climate scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, working with the best data available.

And your sneering denigration of that graph in your moronic OP, and your idiotic comparison of long range climate prediction and weather prediction (debunked in post #11) are both based on your severe retardation, utter ignorance and lack of education, and, of course, the massive brainwashing by anti-science fossil fuel industry propaganda, delivered to your little confused brain by Rush, FauxNews, Breitbart, and all of the other pushers of fraudulent rightwingnut propaganda and lies.

You didn't debunk anything I showed how foolish once again you and your ilk really are.

There you are retardedly denying reality again, barefarts. Of course I debunked your moronic OP. The graph is based on real science from the scientists at NOAA......and climate prediction is very different from weather prediction, as was well explained in post #11. The only thing you "showed" us was how ignorant, retarded and anti-science you really are.