Yes, you are stupid derpy. The residence time of water vapor is 9 days. The record snow is occurring months after any of the hot weather could have increased the water vapor. Wrap your tiny little head around that fact dipshit.
1500 Miles Of Freezing Cold Temperatures!
- Thread starter S.J.
- Start date
Yes, you are stupid derpy. The residence time of water vapor is 9 days. The record snow is occurring months after any of the hot weather could have increased the water vapor. Wrap your tiny little head around that fact dipshit.
Billy_Bob
Diamond Member
The alarmists can not wrap their heads around the adaptic lapse rate of water and the convection cycle. Their Bogey man, CO2 can not affect the convection rate thus it can not slow the rate at which the earth removes heat from its system.
CO2 was supposed to trap water vapor and heat in the mid troposphere, but empirical evidence has shown that it can not do this.
AGW is dead.. I wish we could get it buried...
CO2 was supposed to trap water vapor and heat in the mid troposphere, but empirical evidence has shown that it can not do this.
AGW is dead.. I wish we could get it buried...
^^ See what I mean, IanC ? Exactly what I'm talking about. A concerted effort to shut down the dialogue.
Billy_Bob
Diamond Member
Your assumption is incorrect.
Removing the stupid and obviously fabricated and unsupported by science talking points is the only way we can get past the agenda driven talking points AND BEGIN TO AGAIN DISCUSS THE SCIENCE.
It's not an "assumption"; it's reading your exact words.
That's why I quoted them --- so you can't edit them after the fact.
Not to worry, there's plenty more where they came from. They fall like acid rain around here.
Surely you're not trying to convince me that the skeptical side in this argument are the ones trying to close down the debate?
I have repeatedly tried to civilly discuss the evidence on many occasions only to have the warmists side shut me down with insults and deflection.
That said, I think many or most come here for the sandbox insults and banter, and I wouldn't want to deny them of their fun.
I don't know about "convincing" anyone of anything around here. I simply pointed to an example of the absolutism I was talking about.
Those would be fallacies too. But I'm talking about absolutism. By which I mean "here's what I believe, and that's the final word and that's all there is to it, now shut up and furthermore
"I think so too. But it doesn't resolve anything.
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
Unusually warm temperatures dominate three areas of the North Pacific: the Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska and an area off Southern California. The darker the red, the further above average the sea surface temperature. NOAA researchers are tracking the temperatures and their implications for marine life.
Unusual North Pacific warmth jostles marine food chain - Northwest Fisheries Science Center
Wrap you little head around that map, Wallyeyes, you dumb ass.
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 160,607
- 87,060
- 2,645
Snow is a thing of the past...er, well
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 160,607
- 87,060
- 2,645
Unusually warm temperatures dominate three areas of the North Pacific: the Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska and an area off Southern California. The darker the red, the further above average the sea surface temperature. NOAA researchers are tracking the temperatures and their implications for marine life.
Unusual North Pacific warmth jostles marine food chain - Northwest Fisheries Science Center
Wrap you little head around that map, Wallyeyes, you dumb ass.
^ Weather, not Climate
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 160,607
- 87,060
- 2,645
That was BEFORE they got caught hiding the decline
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
The Pacific Ocean may be thousands of miles from Chicago, but higher temperatures in the gigantic body of water could still be partly to blame for the arctic air that has come carpetbagging into the Midwest this season, according to meteorologists.
Unusually warm conditions in the northern Pacific helped give rise this fall to a massive dome of mild air over western North America. Acting like a chute, that ridge has hurtled bitter blasts into the area since about November, sent temperatures plunging during the "polar vortex" earlier this month and is expected to keep the cold coming for the remainder of the winter.
- See more at: Warm water in the Pacific drives arctic blasts in Chicago. - Chicago Tribune
And the warm water vapor that gets put into that stream of cold air comes out as snow in the midwest and east coast.
Unusually warm conditions in the northern Pacific helped give rise this fall to a massive dome of mild air over western North America. Acting like a chute, that ridge has hurtled bitter blasts into the area since about November, sent temperatures plunging during the "polar vortex" earlier this month and is expected to keep the cold coming for the remainder of the winter.
- See more at: Warm water in the Pacific drives arctic blasts in Chicago. - Chicago Tribune
And the warm water vapor that gets put into that stream of cold air comes out as snow in the midwest and east coast.
I don't know about "convincing" anyone of anything around here. I simply pointed to an example of the absolutism I was talking about.
Those would be fallacies too. But I'm talking about absolutism. By which I mean "here's what I believe, and that's the final word and that's all there is to it, now shut up and furthermore
I think so too. But it doesn't resolve anything.
That DEFINES the AGW supporters to a "T". Thank you for making that so crystal clear!
Unusually warm temperatures dominate three areas of the North Pacific: the Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska and an area off Southern California. The darker the red, the further above average the sea surface temperature. NOAA researchers are tracking the temperatures and their implications for marine life.
Unusual North Pacific warmth jostles marine food chain - Northwest Fisheries Science Center
Wrap you little head around that map, Wallyeyes, you dumb ass.
"September 2014"
Wrap your tiny little head around that date, dumbass.
I don't know about "convincing" anyone of anything around here. I simply pointed to an example of the absolutism I was talking about.
Those would be fallacies too. But I'm talking about absolutism. By which I mean "here's what I believe, and that's the final word and that's all there is to it, now shut up and furthermore
I think so too. But it doesn't resolve anything.
That DEFINES the AGW supporters to a "T". Thank you for making that so crystal clear!
Whatever that's supposed to mean...
Come up with anything from that thread months ago where you made up shit that I said and then couldn't find it?
Should I, what, check back in another year?
See what I mean IanC ? Ya can't dialogue with these types.
Last edited:
I don't know about "convincing" anyone of anything around here. I simply pointed to an example of the absolutism I was talking about.
Those would be fallacies too. But I'm talking about absolutism. By which I mean "here's what I believe, and that's the final word and that's all there is to it, now shut up and furthermore
I think so too. But it doesn't resolve anything.
That DEFINES the AGW supporters to a "T". Thank you for making that so crystal clear!
Whatever that's supposed to mean...
Come up with anything from that thread months ago where you made up shit that I said and then couldn't find it?
Should I, what, check back in another year?
See what I mean IanC ? Ya can't dialogue with these types.
"THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED", sounds pretty absolute to me. How about you?
I don't know about "convincing" anyone of anything around here. I simply pointed to an example of the absolutism I was talking about.
Those would be fallacies too. But I'm talking about absolutism. By which I mean "here's what I believe, and that's the final word and that's all there is to it, now shut up and furthermore
I think so too. But it doesn't resolve anything.
That DEFINES the AGW supporters to a "T". Thank you for making that so crystal clear!
Whatever that's supposed to mean...
Come up with anything from that thread months ago where you made up shit that I said and then couldn't find it?
Should I, what, check back in another year?
See what I mean IanC ? Ya can't dialogue with these types.
"THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED", sounds pretty absolute to me. How about you?
And the link to where I've ever said anything remotely resembling that is ..... where again?
Should I check back in -- what, ten years?
I don't know about "convincing" anyone of anything around here. I simply pointed to an example of the absolutism I was talking about.
Those would be fallacies too. But I'm talking about absolutism. By which I mean "here's what I believe, and that's the final word and that's all there is to it, now shut up and furthermore
I think so too. But it doesn't resolve anything.
That DEFINES the AGW supporters to a "T". Thank you for making that so crystal clear!
Whatever that's supposed to mean...
Come up with anything from that thread months ago where you made up shit that I said and then couldn't find it?
Should I, what, check back in another year?
See what I mean IanC ? Ya can't dialogue with these types.
It's easy to point fingers at transgressions. Can you point me to some of your posts where you building a case to support a position? I have no background on you to judge your style or put things into context.
Similar threads
