Greenland Temperatures Highest in at Least 1,000 years

[Doc7505]

Why did Earthâs surface temperature stop rising in the past decade?

The most likely explanation for the lack of significant warming at the Earth’s surface in the past decade or so is that natural climate cycles caused shifts in ocean circulation patterns that moved some excess heat into the deep ocean.

www.climate.gov

**********​

Hot Air: No Global Warming for Eight Years

pjmedia.com

 

[skookerasbil]

Whooooops

 

[Sunsettommy]

I reply to POST 59 by Crick:

I have never even suggested that consensus produces science. What I have consistently argued is that consensus is a valid measure of the acceptance, by scientists, of a scientific theory. There is no other way to do so.

No it isn't a valid measure at all since it doesn't advance science research it is REPRODUCIBLE research that advances science since they answer questions posted made in the hypothesis stage whether they are on the right track for continuation of research.

Do you think the world's scientists are not supporters of reproducible research? THEY are the ones agreeing with the IPCC conclusions which are, in turn, based on their own study conclusions.

LOL, Consensus and Reproducible research are two totally different things only one is about research and the other is a politically derived popularity position thus you have NOTHING here that is meaningful.

You have not shown that any significant number of active, published climate scientists disagree with the IPCC conclusions.

Now you are just lying here since I posted HUNDREDS of papers that doesn't support the AGW conjecture, and they are well listed in another thread post you ignored:

POST 66

The history of science is filled with failures. That is how it progresses. That progress produces a more and more accurate and a more and more detailed understanding of how nature actually works. If the understanding and knowledge of science didn't improve over time, then science itself would be failing. It quite obviously is not.

I gave you numerous examples of consensus positions fighting science research and results that contradicted the consensus position which eventually was vindicated, and consensus was beaten but after decades or even more than 100 years passed which means you are LYING again!

Do you remember when dark matter and dark energy were discovered? How about when it was found that the expansion of the universe was accelerating? How about the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background? The invention of the LASER? The first production of a Bose-Einstein Condensate? The merger of the EM and Weak forces? The discovery of magnetic stripes in the ocean floor? The mitosis-limiting nature of DNA telomomeres? The discovery of quarks? The discovery of high-temperature super conductors? The proof of Fermat's Last Theorem? I remember all these things happening. All of those and hundreds more represented major shifts in our understanding of how the universe works. I did not resist them. I questioned some when I first heard of them, but I read the research and I read the opinions of scientists on that research and I accepted them. I find such changes exciting. For not only do such things represent major steps in our journey upward but they always open up countless other questions no one had ever thought before to ask. The process is endless, but the granularity becomes finer and finer and finer.

Yawn, you continue to confuse consensus claims with reproducible research that over time clarifies the science while consensus doesn't settle anything at all, published science research is the only way to advance understanding on anything.

Consensus is politics while Reproducible research is advancing science that is the reality you need to embrace.

I till tell you who I do not treat like gods: posters on this site who think getting a C in their 9th grade science class makes them smarter and more knowledgeable than all the world's real scientists put together.

Dr. Mann has already been proven to be wrong over and over and the bald jack ass has lost two lawsuits because he wouldn't let it go to trial and he will lose to Steyn for the same reason.

I know of a man named Milton Humason who didn't finish high school when he made a significant discovery in the field of astronomy or that of Meteorologist Wegener who didn't have a geology degree to figure out that continents moves even proposed correctly that South America and Aftrica were once joined, the Geologists of his day scoffed........

I could go on and on..... but have already posted a nice list of people several times before.

You are terrible at this.

That rather blows the charge that non-consensus views don't get published.

You lie so easily and often as POST 66 shows which you ignored almost all of it in your reply which I addressed in POST 73 which you never responded then you ran away never addressing the rest of POST 66 because you know they are indisputable.

You can't name me one.

Another lie since many here have posted clear examples of AGW failures.

No Lower Tropospheric "Hot Spot" exist.

No Positive Feedback Loop exists.

This after 30 years of searching!!!

 

[themirrorthief]

IM a little shocked there is someone still alive that was around a thousand years ago