Indeed.......the Rolling Thunder guy would gleefully buy a big old bag of dog poop for $1,000.00 a pop if it was packaged just right!!These people grow up in thatched cottages and fall for every single PC bullshit thing hook, line and stinker.
You gotta love how these tinfoil hat deniers manufacture their conspiracy theories. these pinheads habitually ***** that many of the temperature stations are in bad locations and their data should be removed from the data set and a new data set should be charted without these poorly placed stations.from NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Whither U.S. Climate?and of course the blink comparer to show how the data has been 'improved' since 1999
The perfect catch-22 for deniers.
0.4 Degrees!!!
w0w..............w0w!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Gee......thats really mindnumbing s0n!!!Astounding actually..............
There are simply some people that you can toss onto any Likert Scale ( frequently used for charting mood for people with depressive disorders) and make one end of it HYSTERICAL.............. and no matter what you're trying to measure in life, they're going to tend to the hysterical end in most area's. We all know them in our lives.....the one's who you walk away from after a conversation and just shrug your shoulders and giggle your ass off!!!
Have you ever noticed that the most pompous and condescending CON$ are actually the stupidest??
AnotherReally? You're that petrified of a 0.4 degree rise? What do you think the temp swing is in your neck of the woods between winter and summer? Do you melt like a bowl of ice cream? Are you a bowl of ice cream?
know-it-all who can't read a chart or do simple arithmetic!!! No, you rely on "fuzzy math" obviously!!
AnotherReally? You're that petrified of a 0.4 degree rise? What do you think the temp swing is in your neck of the woods between winter and summer? Do you melt like a bowl of ice cream? Are you a bowl of ice cream?
No, you rely on "fuzzy math" obviously!!
In order for the globe to "CONTINUE" to cool, it will have to start cooling first. But deniers always put the cart before the horse.Sure thing dood! We'll see how you guys try to spin the next decade or three as the globe continues to cool.Another
No, you rely on "fuzzy math" obviously!!
In order for the globe to "CONTINUE" to cool, it will have to start cooling first. But deniers always put the cart before the horse.Sure thing dood! We'll see how you guys try to spin the next decade or three as the globe continues to cool.Another
No, you rely on "fuzzy math" obviously!!
More denier cult nonsense from oil industry stooge Stephen Goddard.
Here's the actual facts.
Despite Subtle Differences, Global Temperature Records in Close Agreement
NASA - GISS
January 13, 2011
(excerpts)
Groups of scientists from several major institutions — NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), NOAA's National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), the Japanese Meteorological Agency and the Met Office Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom — tally data collected by temperature monitoring stations spread around the world and make an announcement about whether the previous year was a comparatively warm or cool year.
"The three official records vary slightly because of subtle differences in the way we analyze the data, but they agree extraordinarily well," said Dr. Reto Ruedy, one of Hansen's colleagues at GISS who helps analyze global surface temperatures.
All three records show peaks and valleys that vary in virtual sync with each other since 1880. All three show particularly rapid warming in the last few decades. And all three show the last decade is the warmest in the instrumental record.
Invariably, a great deal of attention centers on each year's ranking, but it is critical to focus on the decade-long trends that matter more, the GISS scientists emphasize. On that time scale, the three records are unequivocal: the last decade has been the warmest on record.
Multiple institutions monitor global surface temperatures. Despite subtle differences in the ways
the scientists perform their analyses, these four widely referenced records show remarkable agreement.
(Image credit: NASA Earth Observatory/Robert Simmon)
In 2010, global temperatures continued to rise. A new analysis from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies shows that
2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record, and was part of the warmest decade on record. The thin line represents
annual data, while the thick line is a five-year running mean.
(Image credit: NASA Earth Observatory/Robert Simmon)
***
You gotta love how these tinfoil hat deniers manufacture their conspiracy theories. these pinheads habitually ***** that many of the temperature stations are in bad locations and their data should be removed from the data set and a new data set should be charted without these poorly placed stations.from NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Whither U.S. Climate?and of course the blink comparer to show how the data has been 'improved' since 1999
Then when the new data set is posted they cry foul because the data set changed.
Ian, you have Christy and Spencer's UAH satellite chart as your icon, why don't you post a blink comparer of their data from when they deliberately used the opposite sign to adjust for diurnal satellite drift and after the correct sign was used and then accuse them of fudging the data too?!
Oh, that's Right, you would have to stop being a hypocrite.
Never mind.
You gotta love the "logic" of deniers, there's snow in the mountains so the whole globe is cooling. The decade AFTER 2000 was the WARMEST decade in the history of direct instrument measurement.I guess you hadn't noticed that there are SEVEN ski resorts that are STILL OPEN! Here it is the Fourth of July and ski resorts are still getting paying customers. What I find particularly amusing is when it really was warm (before the year 2000) the mantra from you guys was there would be no more snow in winter. Now that it is getting cold your mantra is "well when it gets hot you get more snow because of water vapor....so riddle us this batman, why didn't it happen just a few years ago when it was really warmer? Hmmmm? You guys are a hoot!In order for the globe to "CONTINUE" to cool, it will have to start cooling first. But deniers always put the cart before the horse.
I would like to point out that when Christy and Spencer at UAH were cooking the Troposphere satellite data, deniers were saying that only their satellite was the most accurate. I predicted then that when the Troposphere data no longer supported their denials, they would then switch to something/anything else they could dream up to support their denials. They haven't disappointed me. Now no satellite data is accurate since the UAH data can no longer be cooked and only the US ground data, that was worthless because it came from Hansen when the deniers were using the cooked UAH data, is suddenly the most accurate to determine the temperature of the whole globe.
They were posted for you at least a half a dozen times in other threads and every time you pretend they were never posted.You gotta love how these tinfoil hat deniers manufacture their conspiracy theories. these pinheads habitually ***** that many of the temperature stations are in bad locations and their data should be removed from the data set and a new data set should be charted without these poorly placed stations.
Then when the new data set is posted they cry foul because the data set changed.
Ian, you have Christy and Spencer's UAH satellite chart as your icon, why don't you post a blink comparer of their data from when they deliberately used the opposite sign to adjust for diurnal satellite drift and after the correct sign was used and then accuse them of fudging the data too?!
Oh, that's Right, you would have to stop being a hypocrite.
Never mind.
please post up some links that tell the story of this great scandal at UAH. at least some pre-drift correction temps graphs. I have looked and all I find are collegiate error correcting papers between UAH and RSS. and the last two versions of RSS have been adjusted down to come in line with UAH. please, I really am interested in the information.
They were posted for you at least a half a dozen times in other threads and every time you pretend they were never posted.You gotta love how these tinfoil hat deniers manufacture their conspiracy theories. these pinheads habitually ***** that many of the temperature stations are in bad locations and their data should be removed from the data set and a new data set should be charted without these poorly placed stations.
Then when the new data set is posted they cry foul because the data set changed.
Ian, you have Christy and Spencer's UAH satellite chart as your icon, why don't you post a blink comparer of their data from when they deliberately used the opposite sign to adjust for diurnal satellite drift and after the correct sign was used and then accuse them of fudging the data too?!
Oh, that's Right, you would have to stop being a hypocrite.
Never mind.
please post up some links that tell the story of this great scandal at UAH. at least some pre-drift correction temps graphs. I have looked and all I find are collegiate error correcting papers between UAH and RSS. and the last two versions of RSS have been adjusted down to come in line with UAH. please, I really am interested in the information.
The CCSP SAP 1.1 Executive Summary co-written by Christy states:
Convening Lead Author: Tom M. L. Wigley, NSF NCAR
Lead Authors: V. Ramaswamy, NOAA; J.R. Christy, Univ. of AL
in Huntsville; J.R. Lanzante, NOAA; C.A. Mears, Remote Sensing
Systems; B.D. Santer, DOE LLNL; C.K. Folland, U.K. Met Office
"Previously reported discrepancies between the amount of warming near the surface and higher in the atmosphere have been used to challenge the reliability of climate models and the reality of human induced global warming. Specifically, surface data showed substantial global-average warming, while early versions of satellite and radiosonde data showed little or no warming above the surface. This significant discrepancy no longer exists because errors in the satellite and radiosonde data have been identified and corrected. New data sets have also been developed that do not show such discrepancies."
That's different. Somehow. It just is.
While Christy and Spencer were fudging the data, deniers said they were the foremost experts on satellite data and all the others were ignorant Hansen puppets.
You gotta love the "logic" of deniers, there's snow in the mountains so the whole globe is cooling. The decade AFTER 2000 was the WARMEST decade in the history of direct instrument measurement.I guess you hadn't noticed that there are SEVEN ski resorts that are STILL OPEN! Here it is the Fourth of July and ski resorts are still getting paying customers. What I find particularly amusing is when it really was warm (before the year 2000) the mantra from you guys was there would be no more snow in winter. Now that it is getting cold your mantra is "well when it gets hot you get more snow because of water vapor....so riddle us this batman, why didn't it happen just a few years ago when it was really warmer? Hmmmm? You guys are a hoot!In order for the globe to "CONTINUE" to cool, it will have to start cooling first. But deniers always put the cart before the horse.
Actually I do get it, no matter how many ski resorts are open, the decade AFTER 2000 was STILL the WARMEST decade in the history of direct instrument measurement. So if, as you said, it was REALLY warm before 2000, it must be REALLY REALLY warm after 2000, and you have egg on your face.
