Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Who is generating statistics from the combined data? No one. The instrumented data and the model projection data are added for comparison purposes. And as I have stated before, for the low resolution proxy data to contain a hidden transient equivalent to current conditions, temperatures would have to rise 1.2C and then fall 1.2C WITHIN THE PROXY'S RESOLUTION. Can you name a circumstance that could cause that to happen in what you claim to be 60 years?
www.wnd.com
Also fact.
The Climate Change Cult predictions have been wrong over and over again
All the Times Global Warming Predictions Were Dead Wrong
All the Times Global Warming Predictions Were Dead Wrong
We've heard so much nonsense over the past half-century when it comes to global warming predictions. These 10 failed global warming predictions prove that there's hardly a 'consensus' about how the climate is changingwww.westernjournal.com
Published: Aug 08, 2018
Author: C. Doug…
Estimated Reading Time:10 mins
See full list on westernjournal.com
- Global cooling is the real problem. When the environmentalist movement began in earnest …
- If global warming isn’t reversed by the year 2000, it will be too late to avert catastrophe. Do …
- We’ll be living in Antarctica pretty soon. Ten years ago, a group called Forum for the Future …
- Great Britain will be almost snow-less thanks to global warming. Back in 2000, climate …
A Brief History of Fantastically Wrong Climate Change Predictions
Apr 24, 2017 · Apr 24, 2017. The modern environmentalist movement began in earnest in 1970, when activists founded Earth Day as a way to call attention to the ways in which man-made climate change was destroying the planet. Then, as now, those activists claimed a scientific consensus about just how devastating the impact of climate change would be, yet for 45 years …50 years of predictions that the climate apocalypse is nigh
Nov 13, 2021 · In 1989, a senior UN environmental official shaved a year off that dire prediction, saying that if we didn’t fix climate change by 1999, we would have“Global disaster, nations wiped off …Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions
Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions - Competitive Enterprise Institute
Modern doomsayers have been predicting climate and environmental disaster since the 1960s. They continue to do so today. None of the apocalyptic predictions with due dates as of today have come true. What follows is a collection of notably wild predictions from notable people in government and...cei.org
See full list on cei.org
- 1974: ‘Another Ice Age?’
- 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life’
- 1976: ‘The Cooling’
- 1980: ‘Acid Rain Kills Life in Lakes’
The Climate Change Cult predictions have been wrong over and over again
All the Times Global Warming Predictions Were Dead Wrong
All the Times Global Warming Predictions Were Dead Wrong
We've heard so much nonsense over the past half-century when it comes to global warming predictions. These 10 failed global warming predictions prove that there's hardly a 'consensus' about how the climate is changing
Published: Aug 08, 2018
Author: C. Doug…
Estimated Reading Time:10 mins
See full list on westernjournal.com
- Global cooling is the real problem. When the environmentalist movement began in earnest …
- If global warming isn’t reversed by the year 2000, it will be too late to avert catastrophe. Do …
- We’ll be living in Antarctica pretty soon. Ten years ago, a group called Forum for the Future …
- Great Britain will be almost snow-less thanks to global warming. Back in 2000, climate …
A Brief History of Fantastically Wrong Climate Change Predictions
Apr 24, 2017 · Apr 24, 2017. The modern environmentalist movement began in earnest in 1970, when activists founded Earth Day as a way to call attention to the ways in which man-made climate change was destroying the planet. Then, as now, those activists claimed a scientific consensus about just how devastating the impact of climate change would be, yet for 45 years …50 years of predictions that the climate apocalypse is nigh
Nov 13, 2021 · In 1989, a senior UN environmental official shaved a year off that dire prediction, saying that if we didn’t fix climate change by 1999, we would have“Global disaster, nations wiped off …Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions
Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions - Competitive Enterprise Institute
Modern doomsayers have been predicting climate and environmental disaster since the 1960s. They continue to do so today. None of the apocalyptic predictions with due dates as of today have come true. What follows is a collection of notably wild predictions from notable people in government and...
See full list on cei.org
- 1974: ‘Another Ice Age?’
- 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life’
- 1976: ‘The Cooling’
- 1980: ‘Acid Rain Kills Life in Lakes’
The Climate Change Cult predictions have been wrong over and over again
All the Times Global Warming Predictions Were Dead Wrong
All the Times Global Warming Predictions Were Dead Wrong
We've heard so much nonsense over the past half-century when it comes to global warming predictions. These 10 failed global warming predictions prove that there's hardly a 'consensus' about how the climate is changing
Published: Aug 08, 2018
Author: C. Doug…
Estimated Reading Time:10 mins
See full list on westernjournal.com
- Global cooling is the real problem. When the environmentalist movement began in earnest …
- If global warming isn’t reversed by the year 2000, it will be too late to avert catastrophe. Do …
- We’ll be living in Antarctica pretty soon. Ten years ago, a group called Forum for the Future …
- Great Britain will be almost snow-less thanks to global warming. Back in 2000, climate …
A Brief History of Fantastically Wrong Climate Change Predictions
Apr 24, 2017 · Apr 24, 2017. The modern environmentalist movement began in earnest in 1970, when activists founded Earth Day as a way to call attention to the ways in which man-made climate change was destroying the planet. Then, as now, those activists claimed a scientific consensus about just how devastating the impact of climate change would be, yet for 45 years …50 years of predictions that the climate apocalypse is nigh
Nov 13, 2021 · In 1989, a senior UN environmental official shaved a year off that dire prediction, saying that if we didn’t fix climate change by 1999, we would have“Global disaster, nations wiped off …Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions
Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions - Competitive Enterprise Institute
Modern doomsayers have been predicting climate and environmental disaster since the 1960s. They continue to do so today. None of the apocalyptic predictions with due dates as of today have come true. What follows is a collection of notably wild predictions from notable people in government and...
See full list on cei.org
- 1974: ‘Another Ice Age?’
- 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life’
- 1976: ‘The Cooling’
- 1980: ‘Acid Rain Kills Life in Lakes’
I read most of your post thinking all along it was a parody. Then it reminded me of this:
President Trump was in peak form during his speech tonight in Commerce, Georgia. At one point Trump roasted John Kerry saying, “You have people like John Kerry worrying about “The Climate!” The climate! Oh, I heard that the other day. . . . Here we are where, Russia’s destroying Ukraine, and threatening us with nuclear weapons, and he’s worried about the ocean will rise 1/100th of 1% in the next 300 fucking years.” - - - - - - - - that was funny : )
I asked 2 ecological engineers who actually build factories and they each did about 6 months of research on the subject.
We have phased big time from mechanical to electronic and because of that factor, Global Warming is bullshit.
Who is generating statistics from the combined data? No one. The instrumented data and the model projection data are added for comparison purposes. And as I have stated before, for the low resolution proxy data to contain a hidden transient equivalent to current conditions, temperatures would have to rise 1.2C and then fall 1.2C WITHIN THE PROXY'S RESOLUTION. Can you name a circumstance that could cause that to happen in what you claim to be 60 years?
All those graphs I posted aren't bullshit. And that methane is around 86 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than CO2 isn't bullshit either. But continue on with your fantasy if you wish. I can't stop you.
The most polluted nations on Earth ARE the Communist nations China then USSR are excellent examples.
CO2 follow temperature change by 6-9 or 9-12 months every year depending on the research.
That is the one chart you failed to post that shows CO2 levels in the year peaks in Winter and Lowest in Summer.
Here is a post that explores the change in some detail:
CO2, GLOBAL WARMING, CLIMATE AND ENERGY
Marcott is talking about a procedure used in processing proxy data to arrive at his final dataset. The tail end of his PROXY data is not robust because there are only a few proxies left. He is NOT performing a statistical analysis on any combination of the final proxy data aggregate combined with the instrumental data and/or the model projection. Idiot.Marcott says completely different you moron!
"Q: What do paleotemperature reconstructions show about the temperature of the last 100 years?
A: Our global paleotemperature reconstruction includes a so-called “uptick” in temperatures during the 20th-century. However, in the paper we make the point that this particular feature is of shorter duration than the inherent smoothing in our statistical averaging procedure, and that it is based on only a few available paleo-reconstructions of the type we used. Thus, the 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions."
How many times do I have to keep repeating the words of Marcott?
This is your H.S. class photo?
View attachment 651552
There's one issue...All those graphs I posted aren't bullshit. And that methane is around 86 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than CO2 isn't bullshit either. But continue on with your fantasy if you wish. I can't stop you.
That might be the biggest pea I ever saw!Marcott says completely different you moron!
"Q: What do paleotemperature reconstructions show about the temperature of the last 100 years?
A: Our global paleotemperature reconstruction includes a so-called “uptick” in temperatures during the 20th-century. However, in the paper we make the point that this particular feature is of shorter duration than the inherent smoothing in our statistical averaging procedure, and that it is based on only a few available paleo-reconstructions of the type we used. Thus, the 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions."
How many times do I have to keep repeating the words of Marcott?
This is your H.S. class photo?
View attachment 651552
The graphs I showed are better.
Methane (CH4) is the second most important greenhouse gas. CH4 is more potent than CO2 because the radiative forcing produced per molecule is greater. In addition, the infrared window is less saturated in the range of wavelengths of radiation absorbed by CH4, so more molecules may fill in the region. However, CH4 exists in far lower concentrations than CO2 in the atmosphere, and its concentrations by volume in the atmosphere are generally measured in parts per billion (ppb) rather than ppm. CH4 also has a considerably shorter residence time in the atmosphere than CO2 (the residence time for CH4 is roughly 10 years, compared with hundreds of years for CO2).There's one issue...
99% of the users here have no expertise in the subject.
A fact...
India and China don't give a damn.
www.britannica.com
Uh huh.Methane (CH4) is the second most important greenhouse gas. CH4 is more potent than CO2 because the radiative forcing produced per molecule is greater. In addition, the infrared window is less saturated in the range of wavelengths of radiation absorbed by CH4, so more molecules may fill in the region. However, CH4 exists in far lower concentrations than CO2 in the atmosphere, and its concentrations by volume in the atmosphere are generally measured in parts per billion (ppb) rather than ppm. CH4 also has a considerably shorter residence time in the atmosphere than CO2 (the residence time for CH4 is roughly 10 years, compared with hundreds of years for CO2).
Greenhouse gas - Methane, Climate Change, Emissions
Greenhouse gas - Methane, Climate Change, Emissions: Methane (CH4) is the second most important greenhouse gas. CH4 is more potent than CO2 because the radiative forcing produced per molecule is greater. In addition, the infrared window is less saturated in the range of wavelengths of radiation...
Marcott is talking about a procedure used in processing proxy data to arrive at his final dataset. He is NOT performing a statistical analysis on the proxy data combined with the instrumental data and/or the model projection. Idiot.
Methane is officially 25 times but irrelevant since it is a hyper trace gas with negligible IR absorption spectra.
It is a negligible warm forcer far less than the already low CO2 warm forcing effect.
If I shove my head up my own ass I might get a better idea of why you types are constantly worried about the weather.
Call me when the coastal cities are under water
