France record temperature.....more fakery!!

[skookerasbil]

You seriously think they're lying about the temperature?

Oy........sometimes you read posts in here ^^^ that make one wonder how somebody even had the thought processing ability to be able to register for the site.

When I was a kid, for shits and giggles, we'd break an egg on a real hot day out on the middle of the concrete street and watch it fry. I guess the climate obsessed idiots never did it and if they did, they'd put the egg on the dirt in the shade behind the house out of the sun!

 

[Pilot1]

The Man Made Climate NAZI's have been changing and manipulating temperature data, and other factors to get the results THEY WANT in their flawed modelling. The Communists in Europe may believe your B.S., but thinking America doesn't. It is the weak minded, statists, and globalists, (the brainwashed) that believe in MAN MADE climate change.

The Sun and some other NATURAL factors affect weather and climate.

 

[Taz]

You seriously think they're lying about the temperature?

Climate science, has been ling about temperatures for decades now....the evidence is incontrovertible.

Then you must have a link.

 

[evenflow1969]

you are an idiot. france jus

What a joke.........you cant even make this shit up!!. Check out where the temperature measurement was taken from >>

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/29/frances-new-hottest-recorded-temperature-ever-is-in-question-guess-where-it-was-measured/

Wont even raise and eyebrow to any climate crusader. Which begs the question........why?

Zombieism is ghey.

France just like us has multiple weather stations. YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

 

[Sunsettommy]

you are an idiot. france jus

What a joke.........you cant even make this shit up!!. Check out where the temperature measurement was taken from >>

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/29/frances-new-hottest-recorded-temperature-ever-is-in-question-guess-where-it-was-measured/

Wont even raise and eyebrow to any climate crusader. Which begs the question........why?

Zombieism is ghey.

France just like us has multiple weather stations. YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

You didn't read the link since it was SPECIFICALLY talking about the location that produced a record high, it is an obviously contaminated site.

Next time stick with the article at hand, then you might not look so ignorant and dumb.

Meanwhile past history is your teacher:

France’s 70-Day Heat Wave Of 1911 Killed 41,000 In “Uninterrupted Heat”, Most Were Babies

and,

Record High Temperatures in France: 3 Facts the Media Don’t Tell You

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

 

[evenflow1969]

you are an idiot. france jus

What a joke.........you cant even make this shit up!!. Check out where the temperature measurement was taken from >>

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/29/frances-new-hottest-recorded-temperature-ever-is-in-question-guess-where-it-was-measured/

Wont even raise and eyebrow to any climate crusader. Which begs the question........why?

Zombieism is ghey.

France just like us has multiple weather stations. YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

You didn't read the link since it was SPECIFICALLY talking about the location that produced a record high, it is an obviously contaminated site.

Next time stick with the article at hand, then you might not look so ignorant and dumb.

Meanwhile past history is your teacher:

France’s 70-Day Heat Wave Of 1911 Killed 41,000 In “Uninterrupted Heat”, Most Were Babies

and,

Record High Temperatures in France: 3 Facts the Media Don’t Tell You

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

You are the one ignorant and dumb these readings were taken from multiple sites so go blow your self.

 

[Sunsettommy]

you are an idiot. france jus

What a joke.........you cant even make this shit up!!. Check out where the temperature measurement was taken from >>

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/29/frances-new-hottest-recorded-temperature-ever-is-in-question-guess-where-it-was-measured/

Wont even raise and eyebrow to any climate crusader. Which begs the question........why?

Zombieism is ghey.

France just like us has multiple weather stations. YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

You didn't read the link since it was SPECIFICALLY talking about the location that produced a record high, it is an obviously contaminated site.

Next time stick with the article at hand, then you might not look so ignorant and dumb.

Meanwhile past history is your teacher:

France’s 70-Day Heat Wave Of 1911 Killed 41,000 In “Uninterrupted Heat”, Most Were Babies

and,

Record High Temperatures in France: 3 Facts the Media Don’t Tell You

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

You are the one ignorant and dumb these readings were taken from multiple sites so go blow your self.

Again you make clear you didn't read the ARTICLE that discusses the LOCATION where a record high was recorded was discovered to be from a contaminated site, meaning that the record might not be valid, not only that you ignore additional information about additional temperature readings and regional weather that I posted.

It is clear you are another brainless jerk who shows profound disinterest in learning the whole story. The heatwave in Western Europe is nearly matched with a Coldwave in the East part of Europe, but your stupidity kept you from learning this.

I wrote this that you didn't think over rationally since I did acknowledge there is a regional heatwave:

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

 

[SSDD]

You seriously think they're lying about the temperature?

Climate science, has been ling about temperatures for decades now....the evidence is incontrovertible.

Then you must have a link.

The instances of temperature tampering are legion...very interesting that you are unaware of the practice...can you give me a rational, scientifically valid reason to alter temporaries from 20, 50, 75, and even 100 years or more ago?

 

[forkup]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

News Flash! It gets hot in summer!

You will notice that all of the climate crusaders are people who just for some reason tend to the hysterical. They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!". Come next winter, go to the local supermarket and find the customer loading up 3 baskets of food with a 6 inch snowstorm approaching. Dollar to a thousand stale donuts that person is a climate crusader like Taz.....they just navigate life waiting for the house to fall out of the sky on top of them.

My neighbor across the street.........same thing. Climate crusader........strides over when he see's some gun range targets Ive put up in my garage. Freaked him out......was like he was having a panic attack. That's how these people are.....just prone to being suckered by bomb throwers.

They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!".

So a "climate crusader" is dumb for using a thunderstorm to affirm climate change. But a climate change denier can use a single heat record to deny it?
Do you see any problem here at all?

 

[SSDD]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

News Flash! It gets hot in summer!

You will notice that all of the climate crusaders are people who just for some reason tend to the hysterical. They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!". Come next winter, go to the local supermarket and find the customer loading up 3 baskets of food with a 6 inch snowstorm approaching. Dollar to a thousand stale donuts that person is a climate crusader like Taz.....they just navigate life waiting for the house to fall out of the sky on top of them.

My neighbor across the street.........same thing. Climate crusader........strides over when he see's some gun range targets Ive put up in my garage. Freaked him out......was like he was having a panic attack. That's how these people are.....just prone to being suckered by bomb throwers.

They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!".

So a "climate crusader" is dumb for using a thunderstorm to affirm climate change. But a climate change denier can use a single heat record to deny it?
Do you see any problem here at all?

Us skeptics generally mention to you climate crusaders that to date, there has not been a single paper published in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and blamed on greenhouse gasses...and the generally ask for something simple like a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability..and you people never seem to be able to mange even a single piece of such evidence to support your position....we are skeptics because there simply is no actual evidence to support the claims...but feel free to prove me wrong...show me some actual observed measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...

Climate crusaders are dumb for being so gullible that they swallow a piss poor hypothesis like the AGW hypothesis when there is not any actual evidence to support it...and the tragic thing is that they don't seem to know that there is no actual evidence to support it...Hell, I bet you are thinking to yourself that there is plenty of evidence....and you probably even think you have seen some...but you aren't going to be able to show even a single piece because in reality...no such evidence exists...so in the end, the best you will be able to do is offer up some lame excuse for not being able to provide any such evidence.

 

[forkup]

you are an idiot. france jus

What a joke.........you cant even make this shit up!!. Check out where the temperature measurement was taken from >>

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/29/frances-new-hottest-recorded-temperature-ever-is-in-question-guess-where-it-was-measured/

Wont even raise and eyebrow to any climate crusader. Which begs the question........why?

Zombieism is ghey.

France just like us has multiple weather stations. YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

You didn't read the link since it was SPECIFICALLY talking about the location that produced a record high, it is an obviously contaminated site.

Next time stick with the article at hand, then you might not look so ignorant and dumb.

Meanwhile past history is your teacher:

France’s 70-Day Heat Wave Of 1911 Killed 41,000 In “Uninterrupted Heat”, Most Were Babies

and,

Record High Temperatures in France: 3 Facts the Media Don’t Tell You

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

You are the one ignorant and dumb these readings were taken from multiple sites so go blow your self.

Again you make clear you didn't read the ARTICLE that discusses the LOCATION where a record high was recorded was discovered to be from a contaminated site, meaning that the record might not be valid, not only that you ignore additional information about additional temperature readings and regional weather that I posted.

It is clear you are another brainless jerk who shows profound disinterest in learning the whole story. The heatwave in Western Europe is nearly matched with a Coldwave in the East part of Europe, but your stupidity kept you from learning this.

I wrote this that you didn't think over rationally since I did acknowledge there is a regional heatwave:

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

 

[Weatherman2020]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

Put a few more weather stations in parking lots and the average temperature will be even higher!

 

[SSDD]

you are an idiot. france jus

What a joke.........you cant even make this shit up!!. Check out where the temperature measurement was taken from >>

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/06/29/frances-new-hottest-recorded-temperature-ever-is-in-question-guess-where-it-was-measured/

Wont even raise and eyebrow to any climate crusader. Which begs the question........why?

Zombieism is ghey.

France just like us has multiple weather stations. YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

You didn't read the link since it was SPECIFICALLY talking about the location that produced a record high, it is an obviously contaminated site.

Next time stick with the article at hand, then you might not look so ignorant and dumb.

Meanwhile past history is your teacher:

France’s 70-Day Heat Wave Of 1911 Killed 41,000 In “Uninterrupted Heat”, Most Were Babies

and,

Record High Temperatures in France: 3 Facts the Media Don’t Tell You

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

You are the one ignorant and dumb these readings were taken from multiple sites so go blow your self.

Again you make clear you didn't read the ARTICLE that discusses the LOCATION where a record high was recorded was discovered to be from a contaminated site, meaning that the record might not be valid, not only that you ignore additional information about additional temperature readings and regional weather that I posted.

It is clear you are another brainless jerk who shows profound disinterest in learning the whole story. The heatwave in Western Europe is nearly matched with a Coldwave in the East part of Europe, but your stupidity kept you from learning this.

I wrote this that you didn't think over rationally since I did acknowledge there is a regional heatwave:

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

 

[forkup]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

News Flash! It gets hot in summer!

You will notice that all of the climate crusaders are people who just for some reason tend to the hysterical. They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!". Come next winter, go to the local supermarket and find the customer loading up 3 baskets of food with a 6 inch snowstorm approaching. Dollar to a thousand stale donuts that person is a climate crusader like Taz.....they just navigate life waiting for the house to fall out of the sky on top of them.

My neighbor across the street.........same thing. Climate crusader........strides over when he see's some gun range targets Ive put up in my garage. Freaked him out......was like he was having a panic attack. That's how these people are.....just prone to being suckered by bomb throwers.

They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!".

So a "climate crusader" is dumb for using a thunderstorm to affirm climate change. But a climate change denier can use a single heat record to deny it?
Do you see any problem here at all?

Us skeptics generally mention to you climate crusaders that to date, there has not been a single paper published in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and blamed on greenhouse gasses...and the generally ask for something simple like a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability..and you people never seem to be able to mange even a single piece of such evidence to support your position....we are skeptics because there simply is no actual evidence to support the claims...but feel free to prove me wrong...show me some actual observed measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...

Climate crusaders are dumb for being so gullible that they swallow a piss poor hypothesis like the AGW hypothesis when there is not any actual evidence to support it...and the tragic thing is that they don't seem to know that there is no actual evidence to support it...Hell, I bet you are thinking to yourself that there is plenty of evidence....and you probably even think you have seen some...but you aren't going to be able to show even a single piece because in reality...no such evidence exists...so in the end, the best you will be able to do is offer up some lame excuse for not being able to provide any such evidence.

There are tons of papers on the subject. Going from sea level measurements. To ice core data. To simple temperature measurements. Just one example. Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997 Natural variations don't account for the rapidity of the changes. Natural variations can be traced. Solar activity, volcanic activity, earth rotation around its axis. Nothing fits the current changes. Except that is one.... human activity.
See science does measure, quantify and look for evidence. The way I see it, simply denying without providing a decent hypothesis to explain the data is faith.
You will find not a SINGLE climatologist or Oceanoligist who denies climate change and you will find few if any, in any other branch of science. What do you think it means that climate change denying finds no credible champions among those that actually research it?

 

[Third Party]

It's still hotter than all its other measurements. So what's your problem?

News Flash! It gets hot in summer!

You will notice that all of the climate crusaders are people who just for some reason tend to the hysterical. They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!". Come next winter, go to the local supermarket and find the customer loading up 3 baskets of food with a 6 inch snowstorm approaching. Dollar to a thousand stale donuts that person is a climate crusader like Taz.....they just navigate life waiting for the house to fall out of the sky on top of them.

My neighbor across the street.........same thing. Climate crusader........strides over when he see's some gun range targets Ive put up in my garage. Freaked him out......was like he was having a panic attack. That's how these people are.....just prone to being suckered by bomb throwers.

They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!".

So a "climate crusader" is dumb for using a thunderstorm to affirm climate change. But a climate change denier can use a single heat record to deny it?
Do you see any problem here at all?

Us skeptics generally mention to you climate crusaders that to date, there has not been a single paper published in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and blamed on greenhouse gasses...and the generally ask for something simple like a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability..and you people never seem to be able to mange even a single piece of such evidence to support your position....we are skeptics because there simply is no actual evidence to support the claims...but feel free to prove me wrong...show me some actual observed measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...

Climate crusaders are dumb for being so gullible that they swallow a piss poor hypothesis like the AGW hypothesis when there is not any actual evidence to support it...and the tragic thing is that they don't seem to know that there is no actual evidence to support it...Hell, I bet you are thinking to yourself that there is plenty of evidence....and you probably even think you have seen some...but you aren't going to be able to show even a single piece because in reality...no such evidence exists...so in the end, the best you will be able to do is offer up some lame excuse for not being able to provide any such evidence.

There are tons of papers on the subject. Going from sea level measurements. To ice core data. To simple temperature measurements. Just one example. Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997 Natural variations don't account for the rapidity of the changes. Natural variations can be traced. Solar activity, volcanic activity, earth rotation around its axis nothing fits the current changes. Except that is one.... human activity.
See science does measure quantify and look for evidence. The way I see it simply denying without providing a decent hypothesis to explain the data is faith.
You will find not a SINGLE climatologist or Oceanoligist who denies climate change and you will find few if any, in any other branch of science. What do you think it means that climate change denying finds no credible champions among those that actually research it?

Climate change is real. Human effect on it is still unproven.

 

[forkup]

you are an idiot. france jus
France just like us has multiple weather stations. YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT.

You didn't read the link since it was SPECIFICALLY talking about the location that produced a record high, it is an obviously contaminated site.

Next time stick with the article at hand, then you might not look so ignorant and dumb.

Meanwhile past history is your teacher:

France’s 70-Day Heat Wave Of 1911 Killed 41,000 In “Uninterrupted Heat”, Most Were Babies

and,

Record High Temperatures in France: 3 Facts the Media Don’t Tell You

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

You are the one ignorant and dumb these readings were taken from multiple sites so go blow your self.

Again you make clear you didn't read the ARTICLE that discusses the LOCATION where a record high was recorded was discovered to be from a contaminated site, meaning that the record might not be valid, not only that you ignore additional information about additional temperature readings and regional weather that I posted.

It is clear you are another brainless jerk who shows profound disinterest in learning the whole story. The heatwave in Western Europe is nearly matched with a Coldwave in the East part of Europe, but your stupidity kept you from learning this.

I wrote this that you didn't think over rationally since I did acknowledge there is a regional heatwave:

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
Some highlights.
Additionally, this study is not (as implied by some coverage) an official publication of the Cato Institute, despite the fact that co-author Craig Idso is an adjunct scientist there. “This study was not published by the Cato Institute,”

published on a WordPress blog run by co-author Joseph D’Aleo — a meteorologist who did not complete a PhD, but who prominently advertises his honorary doctorate on the document’s cover page — is not published in a scientific journal.

a complete lack of discussion of these topics in the report) appear under the banner “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report”.

We reached out to these scientists to ask if this page was meant to imply that those listed individuals were the peer-reviewers news reports were speaking of. Only one person, George Wolff — a former Environmental Protection Agency atmospheric scientist who is now chief scientist for a company called Air Improvement Resource, Inc. — responded to our request.

Does this look like a credible study to you? Not published besides in a blog???

 

[forkup]

News Flash! It gets hot in summer!

You will notice that all of the climate crusaders are people who just for some reason tend to the hysterical. They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!". Come next winter, go to the local supermarket and find the customer loading up 3 baskets of food with a 6 inch snowstorm approaching. Dollar to a thousand stale donuts that person is a climate crusader like Taz.....they just navigate life waiting for the house to fall out of the sky on top of them.

My neighbor across the street.........same thing. Climate crusader........strides over when he see's some gun range targets Ive put up in my garage. Freaked him out......was like he was having a panic attack. That's how these people are.....just prone to being suckered by bomb throwers.

They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!".

So a "climate crusader" is dumb for using a thunderstorm to affirm climate change. But a climate change denier can use a single heat record to deny it?
Do you see any problem here at all?

Us skeptics generally mention to you climate crusaders that to date, there has not been a single paper published in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and blamed on greenhouse gasses...and the generally ask for something simple like a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability..and you people never seem to be able to mange even a single piece of such evidence to support your position....we are skeptics because there simply is no actual evidence to support the claims...but feel free to prove me wrong...show me some actual observed measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...

Climate crusaders are dumb for being so gullible that they swallow a piss poor hypothesis like the AGW hypothesis when there is not any actual evidence to support it...and the tragic thing is that they don't seem to know that there is no actual evidence to support it...Hell, I bet you are thinking to yourself that there is plenty of evidence....and you probably even think you have seen some...but you aren't going to be able to show even a single piece because in reality...no such evidence exists...so in the end, the best you will be able to do is offer up some lame excuse for not being able to provide any such evidence.

There are tons of papers on the subject. Going from sea level measurements. To ice core data. To simple temperature measurements. Just one example. Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997 Natural variations don't account for the rapidity of the changes. Natural variations can be traced. Solar activity, volcanic activity, earth rotation around its axis nothing fits the current changes. Except that is one.... human activity.
See science does measure quantify and look for evidence. The way I see it simply denying without providing a decent hypothesis to explain the data is faith.
You will find not a SINGLE climatologist or Oceanoligist who denies climate change and you will find few if any, in any other branch of science. What do you think it means that climate change denying finds no credible champions among those that actually research it?

Climate change is real. Human effect on it is still unproven.

Fine, then give a credible hypothesis that explains the current changes?
Not for nothing, we KNOW co2 is a greenhouse gas. We KNOW that humans have dramatically have increased the rate of which this gas is released in the atmosphere. We know the earth is warming. What's the unknown here in your opinion?

 

[Third Party]

You will notice that all of the climate crusaders are people who just for some reason tend to the hysterical. They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!". Come next winter, go to the local supermarket and find the customer loading up 3 baskets of food with a 6 inch snowstorm approaching. Dollar to a thousand stale donuts that person is a climate crusader like Taz.....they just navigate life waiting for the house to fall out of the sky on top of them.

My neighbor across the street.........same thing. Climate crusader........strides over when he see's some gun range targets Ive put up in my garage. Freaked him out......was like he was having a panic attack. That's how these people are.....just prone to being suckered by bomb throwers.

They see the same violent thunderstorm we've all been seeing for decades and immediately pivot to "This must be climate change!".

So a "climate crusader" is dumb for using a thunderstorm to affirm climate change. But a climate change denier can use a single heat record to deny it?
Do you see any problem here at all?

Us skeptics generally mention to you climate crusaders that to date, there has not been a single paper published in which the claimed warming due to our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and blamed on greenhouse gasses...and the generally ask for something simple like a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability..and you people never seem to be able to mange even a single piece of such evidence to support your position....we are skeptics because there simply is no actual evidence to support the claims...but feel free to prove me wrong...show me some actual observed measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...

Climate crusaders are dumb for being so gullible that they swallow a piss poor hypothesis like the AGW hypothesis when there is not any actual evidence to support it...and the tragic thing is that they don't seem to know that there is no actual evidence to support it...Hell, I bet you are thinking to yourself that there is plenty of evidence....and you probably even think you have seen some...but you aren't going to be able to show even a single piece because in reality...no such evidence exists...so in the end, the best you will be able to do is offer up some lame excuse for not being able to provide any such evidence.

There are tons of papers on the subject. Going from sea level measurements. To ice core data. To simple temperature measurements. Just one example. Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997 Natural variations don't account for the rapidity of the changes. Natural variations can be traced. Solar activity, volcanic activity, earth rotation around its axis nothing fits the current changes. Except that is one.... human activity.
See science does measure quantify and look for evidence. The way I see it simply denying without providing a decent hypothesis to explain the data is faith.
You will find not a SINGLE climatologist or Oceanoligist who denies climate change and you will find few if any, in any other branch of science. What do you think it means that climate change denying finds no credible champions among those that actually research it?

Climate change is real. Human effect on it is still unproven.

Fine, then give a credible hypothesis that explains the current changes?
Not for nothing, we KNOW co2 is a greenhouse gas. We KNOW that humans have dramatically have increased the rate of which this gas is released in the atmosphere. We know the earth is warming. What's the unknown here in your opinion?

The climate is changing, the other factors may or may not be related to climate change. In my opinion the earth's axis is a bigger force for change than anything we do.

 

[SSDD]

There are tons of papers on the subject. Going from sea level measurements. To ice core data. To simple temperature measurements.

No doubt...there are tons of papers on the subject...what there isn't is anything like actual data to support the claims. Ice core data shows pretty clearly that the present is considerably cooler than it has been for most of the past 10,000 years. That hardly makes your case.

Just one example. Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997

Inferred? Guessed. So you have a paper that is nearly 20 years old and which didn't warrant any further study...there is nothing there but some wild assed guesses...

If AGW theory were correct and increasing atmospheric CO2 caused warming, it would happen because the increased CO2 would capture more long wave radiation in the 2.7, 4.3, and 15 micrometer wavelengths. That means that if one took a snapshot of the outgoing long wave radiation in say 1970 and another snapshot of the outgoing long wave radiation at a later date when more atmospheric CO2 were present, less outgoing long wave radiation in the 2.7, 4.3, and 15 micrometer wavelenghts would prove the basis of AGW theory. An equal or greater amount of outgoing longwave radiation in those wavelengths would disprove the basis for AGW theory as it would indicate that even though more atmospheric CO2 were present, no more long wave radiation was being absorbed by that increased CO2. Well, guess what?

Here is an overlay of snapshots of outgoing long wave radiation taken in 1970 by the sattellite IRIS and in 1997 by the sattellite IMG in 1997. Both snapshots were taken over the central pacific at the same time of the year and under the same conditions.

The X axis of the graph indicates wavelengths. The wavelengths that CO2 absorbs, remember are 2.7, 4.3, and 15 micrometers. All found on the far left side of the graph. The light colored line is the IRIS data collected in 1970 and the darker line is the IMG data from 1997. If AGW theory were correct, the IMG data from 1997 should show less outgoing longwave radiation than the IRIS data from 1970 as there is certainly more CO2 in the atmosphere in 1997 than there was in 1970. As you can see, the longwave radiation from the two separate snapshots is identical indicating no additional absorption of outgoing longwave radiation in the CO2 wavelengths even though there is more CO2 in the atmosphere.

The next two images were taken by IRIS in 1970 and TES in 2006 respectively. In these graphs, the black line represents the actual measurement taken by the sattellite, the red line represents what the climate models predict and the blue line represents the difference between the model data and the actual data.

Feel free to print out the two graphs and overlay them. You will find that the black lines (actual measured data) are identical indicating this time, that there is no difference between outgoing longwave radiation in the CO2 absorption spectrum between 1970 and 2006. Again, if AGW theory were correct, then the outgoing longwave radiation should be less as the blue lines on the graphs indicate. As you can see, this is not the case. There has been no increase in the absorption of outgoing longwave radiation in the CO2 spectrum between 1970 and 2006 in spite of the presence of more atmospheric CO2.

Natural variations don't account for the rapidity of the changes. Natural variations can be traced.{/quote]

What do we know about natural variation in radiation at the TOA prior to satellites? What proxy are you using which would give you enough time to say that we really know anything about the natural variations in outgoing LW in any particular wavelength over a respectable period of time...and 50 years is hardly a respectable period of time to be saying anything about natural variability.

Solar activity, volcanic activity, earth rotation around its axis. Nothing fits the current changes. Except that is one.... human activity.

Sorry guy...nothing but a wild assed assumption...and a 20 year old assumption that didn't pan out at that...

See science does measure, quantify and look for evidence. The way I see it, simply denying without providing a decent hypothesis to explain the data is faith.

At this point you haven't shown me anything at all in the way of observed, measured evidence which favors the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...you have shown me an "inferred" connection from a 20 year old study which didn't spark any further study...were it the smoking gun you seem to believe it to be, it would have sparked a great deal of study...

You will find not a SINGLE climatologist or Oceanoligist who denies climate change and you will find few if any, in any other branch of science.

I don't deny climate change either...it happens all the time..it has always happened and will always happen...what I have a problem with is the pseudoscience used to support claims that we are driving the climate.

What do you think it means that climate change denying finds no credible champions among those that actually research it?

What climate change doesn't have is any observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability.....like I already said..

 

[SSDD]

You didn't read the link since it was SPECIFICALLY talking about the location that produced a record high, it is an obviously contaminated site.

Next time stick with the article at hand, then you might not look so ignorant and dumb.

Meanwhile past history is your teacher:

France’s 70-Day Heat Wave Of 1911 Killed 41,000 In “Uninterrupted Heat”, Most Were Babies

and,

Record High Temperatures in France: 3 Facts the Media Don’t Tell You

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

You are the one ignorant and dumb these readings were taken from multiple sites so go blow your self.

Again you make clear you didn't read the ARTICLE that discusses the LOCATION where a record high was recorded was discovered to be from a contaminated site, meaning that the record might not be valid, not only that you ignore additional information about additional temperature readings and regional weather that I posted.

It is clear you are another brainless jerk who shows profound disinterest in learning the whole story. The heatwave in Western Europe is nearly matched with a Coldwave in the East part of Europe, but your stupidity kept you from learning this.

I wrote this that you didn't think over rationally since I did acknowledge there is a regional heatwave:

There are meteorological maps in the link showing that a corresponding deep cold region is right next door to the European heatwave region.

Why do you guys keep on conflating weather and climate? It really isn't that hard. You want weather. Look at a thermometer. Want climate you look at those readings over extended periods of time and then calculate averages. Guess what? Averages all point up.

All of the adjusted, manipulated, and tortured records point up...the only temperature data network on earth that is so pristinely placed that it requires no adjustment has not shown any warming for more than 10 years. The temperature rise is in the adjustments...not in the actual temperature...

https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf

FACT CHECK: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?
Some highlights.
Additionally, this study is not (as implied by some coverage) an official publication of the Cato Institute, despite the fact that co-author Craig Idso is an adjunct scientist there. “This study was not published by the Cato Institute,”

published on a WordPress blog run by co-author Joseph D’Aleo — a meteorologist who did not complete a PhD, but who prominently advertises his honorary doctorate on the document’s cover page — is not published in a scientific journal.

a complete lack of discussion of these topics in the report) appear under the banner “The Undersigned Agree with the Conclusions of this Report”.

We reached out to these scientists to ask if this page was meant to imply that those listed individuals were the peer-reviewers news reports were speaking of. Only one person, George Wolff — a former Environmental Protection Agency atmospheric scientist who is now chief scientist for a company called Air Improvement Resource, Inc. — responded to our request.

Does this look like a credible study to you? Not published besides in a blog???

So do you have any particular problem with either the data or the methodology? Or do you just not like who did the study? If there are problems with either the data or the methodology, by all means point them out...if you just don't like the people who did the study, then once again..you have nothing.