Giss for Nov reports that we had the warmest November in recorded history

100 year is hardly in a drop in the bucket and once this runs through the mathemtians, like always it will be unseated from that position quietly, with the propaganda left up for the loyal AGW church members.
 
Yeah it was mighty warn Novmember here in Maine.

100 year is hardly in a drop in the bucket and once this runs through the mathemtians, like always it will be unseated from that position quietly, with the propaganda left up for the loyal AGW church members.


True 100 years means nothing on a geological frame of reference.

But you and I and this world, and especially its economy does NOT LIVE in a geological frame of reference. (We live in a human frame of reference)

We live in a frame of reference where significant changes that occur in a mere 100 years ARE something VERY significant.

Now if you do not understand WHY the above is important?

Then it would probably behoove you to find out why I mention this fact.
 
Let me point out that this discussion needs to look neither at a human or a geological time frame, but a CLIMATIC one. Say, 30 years and up. Trends of 100 years, Mr Kosh, are very significant in a discussion of climate.
 
I find it highly amusing that the know-nothings start out with nothing is happening at all, then end with it doesn't matter on a million year time scale. Their lack of logic is displayed for all to see with that kind of dialogue.

A climate changing on a decadel level in a world with 7 billion people dependent on large scale agriculture is at risk. Very high risk.
 
When we show that it's the coldest month on record, the AGW sycophants claim it's meaningless. When they find a warmest month in record it's undeniable proof.

It's a scam as transparent as it gets.
 
When we show that it's the coldest month on record, the AGW sycophants claim it's meaningless. When they find a warmest month in record it's undeniable proof.

It's a scam as transparent as it gets.

Only problem is that we haven't had a "coldest month on record" for a hundred years.
 
GISS has altered, and falsified, data so routinely that they no longer are credible.
 
Matthew, the low-information folks who rely on file leaders and faith will discount your efforts to educate them.

It is what it is.
 
GISS has altered, and falsified, data so routinely that they no longer are credible.

Cling to your myths, little retard, they are all you have left.

Meanwhile the world laughs at you modern 'Flat Earthers'.






Sure thing fruit loop. They just rely on dipshits like you to not bother looking at the evidence and you blissfully comply with your masters wishes. Do you swallow too?


So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.



The world has never seen such freezing heat - Telegraph
 
how many of you thought, "gee this is a really warm November, I wonder if it is a record?"

the satellites dont seem to think it was hot.

so what gives? is Gavin even more of a temperature manipulator than Jimbo was? its pretty hard to BS people about the weather in their own town....but global temps are much more malleable.
 
how many of you thought, "gee this is a really warm November, I wonder if it is a record?"

the satellites dont seem to think it was hot.

so what gives? is Gavin even more of a temperature manipulator than Jimbo was? its pretty hard to BS people about the weather in their own town....but global temps are much more malleable.

The lead post's comment comes from NASA/GISS, not Gavin. Do you think they got it wrong? Have you checked with McIntyre? Have you read both sides and the middle? Your comment above, "How many of you thought..." disappoints me. Just like rejecting Marcott due to the "look" of his proxies. You know better.
 

Forum List

Back
Top