Hot water and storms

Why do you just keep making up whatever you want and thinking that's okay?



Pot, meet kettle. You trot out the same lies over and over, you claim all these storms are getting more powerful when I have shown you one storm sequence back in 1862 DWARFS everything you have presented.

Basically you have no science, and no historical data to support you.

You are, quite literally, full of shit.
 
That would be the exact opposite of my observations. Have you looked at the various authors and contributors to AR6 (and all the previous reports)? Do you really want to claim that many publishing (ie, actively researching), PhD scientists are fudging data, lying and cooking up fraudulent charts? That sort of charge requires some evidence. Got any?


And the parrot insists, I am parroting many many, and if I am the birdbrain bawking, I must be right....

The data is all there.

Highly correlated satellite and balloon data showing no warming in the atmosphere until both were fudged with uncorrellated "corrections" in 2005.


Search for

2005 nbc global warming evaporates
 
Normally one would provide a link rather than a search string, particularly if you wanted me to go to a specific article. But doing so I find an NBC article (not typically where I would got for science news) that discusses the flawed Tropospheric temperature analysis of Roy Spencer. Not his first mistake. He mucked up his satellite data in almost the exact same manner. I assume you reject Sherwood, Santer, Mears and Wentz. If so, would you care to explain why?
 
This is something I've found with people who are firmly attached to the "man made global warming" narrative. They'll ignore lots of things that aren't convenient.

The problem is people who are totally against man made global warming will also do the same thing.

It's Reps v. Dems again and again.
No, it is not. It is willfully ignorant ignoring to their own peril science. Whether concerning vaccines or the effects of global warming on weather extremes. And in both cases the willfully ignorant end up damaging the rest of us with their idiocy.
 
And yet the thermal expansion of the oceans has been pretty constant over the last 6,000 years.

When exactly should we expect to see the acceleration of thermal expansion of the oceans due to greenhouse gases warming the ocean? I mean it's been going on for how many decades? Shouldn't we start to see some acceleration in the rise of sea levels?

Doesn't it make sense that there is a correlation between temperature and sea level rise?

View attachment 532328
LOL Ding, you remain such a dumb fuck. And presenting a graph measured in thousands of years to address changes in the last century is really stupid. Here is a real graph, and the article it is from;

1630373202911.png


 
And the parrot insists, I am parroting many many, and if I am the birdbrain bawking, I must be right....

The data is all there.

Highly correlated satellite and balloon data showing no warming in the atmosphere until both were fudged with uncorrellated "corrections" in 2005.


Search for

2005 nbc global warming evaporates

Hide the Decline

Mann's Nature Trick
 
LOL Ding, you remain such a dumb fuck. And presenting a graph measured in thousands of years to address changes in the last century is really stupid. Here is a real graph, and the article it is from;

View attachment 532895


We all know that modern CO2 evolved beyond its prehistoric cousin CO2. Old CO2 LAGGED temperatures, modern CO2 not only drives it, but causes fires, floods, hurricanes and can even heat the oceans 700m+ deep.

Tell 'em, Rocks!
 

Forum List

Back
Top