What's the temperature, Kenneth

[CrusaderFrank]

You having a hard time with the word MIGHT? Too Funny: ambiguous is about all that paper is, as they have not quantified causation nor have they defined how it MIGHT work in our atmospheric system.

Um, no, they've pretty much established that human activity is causing rises in temps...

Sorry, man.

Based on the "because we say so" method

 

[IanC]

Not at all. My claim is it's natural. You claim it isn't. I said pretty clearly that you need to show us when droughts have never occurred.

Can you get someone to help you with the big words in the articles I posted? Because those articles were all pretty clear on how human activity is causing these UNNATURAL changes in the environment.

Hahahahaha. When was the last time we DIDN'T have claims of unnatural weather in some part of the globe? The people who burned witches for it in the middle ages are the same type of people screeching DENIER now.

 

[Kosh]

Ah, I love climate change deniers who think they are smarter than 95% of the scientists in this field.

And this is what the entire AGW cult relies on:

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

An app cant tell you the temp anyway.
You'd need a thermometer built into your phone,which of course doesnt exist.
They just take the word of someone else checking the temp.

I would trust an app that links me to a site that has millions of dollars of meteorological equipment before a $2.00 alcohol filled thermometer.

Does it link you to the temperature device in your area that was used in 1946 too? Then you could calibrate the two with a third calibrated world wide to determin historic accuracy. Ohhhhh, it doesn't? It can't?

Never mind then

LOL...why is when someone says the temps recorded in those days could be off in the other direction you warmers scoff at the idea?
You Glowbull warmers are so predictable...

Please don't acuse me of being an Al Gore follower

I just vomited in my mouth at the thought.

Sorry bout that..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Denier foot-stamping conspiracy tantrum threads are boring. But it's all they have left now.

We could have intelligent conversations over the amount of warming we'll see, what the effects would be, what mitigation strategies should be used, cost/benefit analysis, and so on. But we don't, because large numbers of nutcases will mindlessly scream about socialist bogeymen, and simply declare that all the actual data has been faked in the name of socialism.

Can you explain to us how it is ".5C 'warmer'" when no one was keeping records accurate to half a degree in the past

Thank you

 

[NYcarbineer]

The belief that climate change is occurring is not a liberal belief. It is a mainstream American belief:

New climate change poll shows Americans believe in global warming.

 

[westwall]

Not at all. My claim is it's natural. You claim it isn't. I said pretty clearly that you need to show us when droughts have never occurred.

Can you get someone to help you with the big words in the articles I posted? Because those articles were all pretty clear on how human activity is causing these UNNATURAL changes in the environment.

No, they weren't. They were all correlational. ANY scientist. Well that is any GOOD scientist, will tell you that correlation does not equal causation. You're excused junior.

 

[Kosh]

Not at all. My claim is it's natural. You claim it isn't. I said pretty clearly that you need to show us when droughts have never occurred.

Can you get someone to help you with the big words in the articles I posted? Because those articles were all pretty clear on how human activity is causing these UNNATURAL changes in the environment.

No, they weren't. They were all correlational. ANY scientist. Well that is any GOOD scientist, will tell you that correlation does not equal causation. You're excused junior.

Here is a link that may help them..

Correlation does not imply causation - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Billy_Bob]

You having a hard time with the word MIGHT? Too Funny: ambiguous is about all that paper is, as they have not quantified causation nor have they defined how it MIGHT work in our atmospheric system.

Um, no, they've pretty much established that human activity is causing rises in temps...

Sorry, man.

You are giving them causation when they have proved nothing. Their findings are not supported by the science hence the words MIGHT and MAY.. These are not conclusive words. You are reading into it what you want it to say instead of reading what it actually says.

 

[jc456]

And this silly emphasis of Mr. Crusader Frank's is a bit of idiocy, in any case. When you have three temps running from 101 degrees, to 120 degrees, halfway up the Alaskan Coast, there is something going on, definately not a cooling trend.

So weather is climate?

 

[westwall]

And this silly emphasis of Mr. Crusader Frank's is a bit of idiocy, in any case. When you have three temps running from 101 degrees, to 120 degrees, halfway up the Alaskan Coast, there is something going on, definately not a cooling trend.

So weather is climate?

If it's hot. Not so much when it's cold though. At least that's what the sheep here claim.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And this silly emphasis of Mr. Crusader Frank's is a bit of idiocy, in any case. When you have three temps running from 101 degrees, to 120 degrees, halfway up the Alaskan Coast, there is something going on, definately not a cooling trend.

Cherry picking one small area of the planet and blaming it on "Manmade Global Climate Warming Change", that's not science.

http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/news/record-cold-early-march

"All-time March record lows have been broken as one more shot of bitterly cold air plunged south in the wake of Winter Storm Thor. Some cities have seen their coldest temperatures in decades for so late in the season."

 

[Old Rocks]

And this silly emphasis of Mr. Crusader Frank's is a bit of idiocy, in any case. When you have three temps running from 101 degrees, to 120 degrees, halfway up the Alaskan Coast, there is something going on, definately not a cooling trend.

Cherry picking one small area of the planet and blaming it on "Manmade Global Climate Warming Change", that's not science.

http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/news/record-cold-early-march

"All-time March record lows have been broken as one more shot of bitterly cold air plunged south in the wake of Winter Storm Thor. Some cities have seen their coldest temperatures in decades for so late in the season."

Mr. CrusaderFrank, is that a selfie on your avatar? And all time record highs were being broken west of the rockies at the same time.

 

[jc456]

You having a hard time with the word MIGHT? Too Funny: ambiguous is about all that paper is, as they have not quantified causation nor have they defined how it MIGHT work in our atmospheric system.

Um, no, they've pretty much established that human activity is causing rises in temps...

Sorry, man.

So you have proof? You'd be the first on here!

 

[jc456]

The belief that climate change is occurring is not a liberal belief. It is a mainstream American belief:

New climate change poll shows Americans believe in global warming.

Dude, climate has always been changing. Nothing new

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And this silly emphasis of Mr. Crusader Frank's is a bit of idiocy, in any case. When you have three temps running from 101 degrees, to 120 degrees, halfway up the Alaskan Coast, there is something going on, definately not a cooling trend.

Cherry picking one small area of the planet and blaming it on "Manmade Global Climate Warming Change", that's not science.

http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/news/record-cold-early-march

"All-time March record lows have been broken as one more shot of bitterly cold air plunged south in the wake of Winter Storm Thor. Some cities have seen their coldest temperatures in decades for so late in the season."

Mr. CrusaderFrank, is that a selfie on your avatar? And all time record highs were being broken west of the rockies at the same time.

Record lows in Colorado

Cherry picking one small area of the planet and blaming it on "Manmade Global Climate Warming Change", that's not science.

Not a selfie, that Owen Dippie's Portrait of Notorious BIG on 5 Pointz. I wish I could paint like that

 

[Old Rocks]

You having a hard time with the word MIGHT? Too Funny: ambiguous is about all that paper is, as they have not quantified causation nor have they defined how it MIGHT work in our atmospheric system.

Um, no, they've pretty much established that human activity is causing rises in temps...

Sorry, man.

So you have proof? You'd be the first on here!

Now Mr. jc456, you are a first class liar. That information has been linked many times for you. Linked to the American Institute of Physics site, linked to articles published in peer reviewed journals giving the absorption spectra of the various GHG's. Just because your level of intellect is incapable of understanding that is not a problem for the rest of us.

 

[jc456]

And this silly emphasis of Mr. Crusader Frank's is a bit of idiocy, in any case. When you have three temps running from 101 degrees, to 120 degrees, halfway up the Alaskan Coast, there is something going on, definately not a cooling trend.

Cherry picking one small area of the planet and blaming it on "Manmade Global Climate Warming Change", that's not science.

http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/news/record-cold-early-march

"All-time March record lows have been broken as one more shot of bitterly cold air plunged south in the wake of Winter Storm Thor. Some cities have seen their coldest temperatures in decades for so late in the season."

Mr. CrusaderFrank, is that a selfie on your avatar? And all time record highs were being broken west of the rockies at the same time.

So what? Isn't that local?

 

[jc456]

You having a hard time with the word MIGHT? Too Funny: ambiguous is about all that paper is, as they have not quantified causation nor have they defined how it MIGHT work in our atmospheric system.

Um, no, they've pretty much established that human activity is causing rises in temps...

Sorry, man.

So you have proof? You'd be the first on here!

Now Mr. jc456, you are a first class liar. That information has been linked many times for you. Linked to the American Institute of Physics site, linked to articles published in peer reviewed journals giving the absorption spectra of the various GHG's. Just because your level of intellect is incapable of understanding that is not a problem for the rest of us.

Still haven't seen any evidence sorry friend. You still haven't disproved Koch's experiment. I'm still waiting.

 

[flacaltenn]

The people who want the country run by the dictates of an unseen unheard supernatural being somewhere up in the sky,

are the same who are complaining that the evidence of global warming isn't scientifically comprehensive enough.

Tell me what this "comprehensive" science says in 2015 about the projected temperature anomaly in 2050 or 2100. I'll take it to the closest 0.5degC...

PS -- Make CERTAIN that 97% of climate scientists agree with that projection.. Without that -- you really have nothing to panic about. It's science doing it's thing with a LOT of interference from political activists of ALL types with a vested interest in how the studies are funded and interpreted.

You've never heard any of the retractions, corrections, or failures of ANY GWarming scary edict I'll wager...