More on the Globull Warming Scam

[mamooth]

There's actually people who want to parse the headline when what the C.I.C. told the cadets was hysterically exaggerated. Not border control. Not keeping terrorists off our shores or intercepting the MEGAtons of dope coming in by sea. Go Ctrl-F yourself Oopty Doodle.. Climate mentioned 28 times, about 30% of his address.

Drugs --- mentioned once.

Yes, the grownups are focusing on reality, and that's causing denier meltdowns. FOX has been leading the mass bedwetting over ISIS for a while, and WUWT has officially jumped on to that very drippy bandwagon. It will soon be a mandated state-of-mind for all conservatives.

The phrase for it is "ooga-booga tactics". It's nearly impossible to take someone seriously if they fall for ooga-booga. Or if someone declares with a straight face that MEGAtons of drugs are arriving by sea, for that matter. That's taking innumeracy to new heights.



I don't think ooga-booga is a viable strategy in the long run, for conservatism or denialism. Can they really maintain that level of terror until the election?

I'm glad to have a CIC who calmly focuses on actual threats instead of ooga-boogaing, and who works on preventing problems before they happen. And the military certainly agrees, as they take global warming very seriously. I guess the military is now part of the socialist plot.

 

[flacaltenn]

There's actually people who want to parse the headline when what the C.I.C. told the cadets was hysterically exaggerated. Not border control. Not keeping terrorists off our shores or intercepting the MEGAtons of dope coming in by sea. Go Ctrl-F yourself Oopty Doodle.. Climate mentioned 28 times, about 30% of his address.

Drugs --- mentioned once.

Yes, the grownups are focusing on reality, and that's causing denier meltdowns. FOX has been leading the mass bedwetting over ISIS for a while, and WUWT has officially jumped on to that very drippy bandwagon. It will soon be a mandated state-of-mind for all conservatives.

The phrase for it is "ooga-booga tactics". It's nearly impossible to take someone seriously if they fall for ooga-booga. Or if someone declares with a straight face that MEGAtons of drugs are arriving by sea, for that matter. That's taking innumeracy to new heights.



I don't think ooga-booga is a viable strategy in the long run, for conservatism or denialism. Can they really maintain that level of terror until the election?

I'm glad to have a CIC who calmly focuses on actual threats instead of ooga-boogaing, and who works on preventing problems before they happen. And the military certainly agrees, as they take global warming very seriously. I guess the military is now part of the socialist plot.

You are so far detached from reality, that its troubling to witness it. YES BOATLOADS.. Or did you miss the factoid about 30% of Baltimore black males being certified addicts.

Ask the Union leadership of the Border Patrol what happens to whistle blowers asserting that boatloads and trainloads of drugs are allowed to pass. Or ask the thousands of folks dying at ISIS hand if they consider them just the "JV team"..

Sad part is -- you did this to yourself and I cant help you. Because when you take the positions you do on all of this -- all that one could possibly do is flail and incoherently babble..

I'm sure YOU wont read it. But former lead IPCC author Dr. P. Lloyd -- just published a study that shows how badly you have to act spastic.

An Estimate of The Centennial Variability of Global Temperatures

Philip J. Lloyd

• Abstract
  
• References
  
• PDF

Abstract
There has been widespread investigation of the drivers of changes in global temperatures. However, there has been remarkably little consideration of the magnitude of the changes to be expected over a period of a few decades or even a century. To address this question, the Holocene records up to 8000 years before present, from several ice cores were examined. The differences in temperatures between all records which are approximately a century apart were determined, after any trends in the data had been removed. The differences were close to normally distributed. The average standard deviation of temperature was 0.98 ± 0.27 °C. This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was due to natural variations.

 

[jc456]

There's actually people who want to parse the headline when what the C.I.C. told the cadets was hysterically exaggerated. Not border control. Not keeping terrorists off our shores or intercepting the MEGAtons of dope coming in by sea. Go Ctrl-F yourself Oopty Doodle.. Climate mentioned 28 times, about 30% of his address.

Drugs --- mentioned once.

Yes, the grownups are focusing on reality, and that's causing denier meltdowns. FOX has been leading the mass bedwetting over ISIS for a while, and WUWT has officially jumped on to that very drippy bandwagon. It will soon be a mandated state-of-mind for all conservatives.

The phrase for it is "ooga-booga tactics". It's nearly impossible to take someone seriously if they fall for ooga-booga. Or if someone declares with a straight face that MEGAtons of drugs are arriving by sea, for that matter. That's taking innumeracy to new heights.



I don't think ooga-booga is a viable strategy in the long run, for conservatism or denialism. Can they really maintain that level of terror until the election?

I'm glad to have a CIC who calmly focuses on actual threats instead of ooga-boogaing, and who works on preventing problems before they happen. And the military certainly agrees, as they take global warming very seriously. I guess the military is now part of the socialist plot.

You are so far detached from reality, that its troubling to witness it. YES BOATLOADS.. Or did you miss the factoid about 30% of Baltimore black males being certified addicts.

Ask the Union leadership of the Border Patrol what happens to whistle blowers asserting that boatloads and trainloads of drugs are allowed to pass. Or ask the thousands of folks dying at ISIS hand if they consider them just the "JV team"..

Sad part is -- you did this to yourself and I cant help you. Because when you take the positions you do on all of this -- all that one could possibly do is flail and incoherently babble..

I'm sure YOU wont read it. But former lead IPCC author Dr. P. Lloyd -- just published a study that shows how badly you have to act spastic.

An Estimate of The Centennial Variability of Global Temperatures

Philip J. Lloyd

• Abstract
  
• References
  
• PDF

Abstract
There has been widespread investigation of the drivers of changes in global temperatures. However, there has been remarkably little consideration of the magnitude of the changes to be expected over a period of a few decades or even a century. To address this question, the Holocene records up to 8000 years before present, from several ice cores were examined. The differences in temperatures between all records which are approximately a century apart were determined, after any trends in the data had been removed. The differences were close to normally distributed. The average standard deviation of temperature was 0.98 ± 0.27 °C. This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was due to natural variations.

He/she is just a nut job

 

[Old Rocks]

There's actually people who want to parse the headline when what the C.I.C. told the cadets was hysterically exaggerated. Not border control. Not keeping terrorists off our shores or intercepting the MEGAtons of dope coming in by sea. Go Ctrl-F yourself Oopty Doodle.. Climate mentioned 28 times, about 30% of his address.

Drugs --- mentioned once.

Yes, the grownups are focusing on reality, and that's causing denier meltdowns. FOX has been leading the mass bedwetting over ISIS for a while, and WUWT has officially jumped on to that very drippy bandwagon. It will soon be a mandated state-of-mind for all conservatives.

The phrase for it is "ooga-booga tactics". It's nearly impossible to take someone seriously if they fall for ooga-booga. Or if someone declares with a straight face that MEGAtons of drugs are arriving by sea, for that matter. That's taking innumeracy to new heights.



I don't think ooga-booga is a viable strategy in the long run, for conservatism or denialism. Can they really maintain that level of terror until the election?

I'm glad to have a CIC who calmly focuses on actual threats instead of ooga-boogaing, and who works on preventing problems before they happen. And the military certainly agrees, as they take global warming very seriously. I guess the military is now part of the socialist plot.

You are so far detached from reality, that its troubling to witness it. YES BOATLOADS.. Or did you miss the factoid about 30% of Baltimore black males being certified addicts.

Ask the Union leadership of the Border Patrol what happens to whistle blowers asserting that boatloads and trainloads of drugs are allowed to pass. Or ask the thousands of folks dying at ISIS hand if they consider them just the "JV team"..

Sad part is -- you did this to yourself and I cant help you. Because when you take the positions you do on all of this -- all that one could possibly do is flail and incoherently babble..

I'm sure YOU wont read it. But former lead IPCC author Dr. P. Lloyd -- just published a study that shows how badly you have to act spastic.

An Estimate of The Centennial Variability of Global Temperatures

Philip J. Lloyd

• Abstract
  
• References
  
• PDF

Abstract
There has been widespread investigation of the drivers of changes in global temperatures. However, there has been remarkably little consideration of the magnitude of the changes to be expected over a period of a few decades or even a century. To address this question, the Holocene records up to 8000 years before present, from several ice cores were examined. The differences in temperatures between all records which are approximately a century apart were determined, after any trends in the data had been removed. The differences were close to normally distributed. The average standard deviation of temperature was 0.98 ± 0.27 °C. This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was due to natural variations.

Energy and Environment - SourceWatch

The journal Energy and Environment is a peer-reviewed social science journal published by Multi-Science. The journal's editor is Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, a reader in geography at the University of Hull in England and climate skeptic. Co-editor is Benny Peiser[1]

Energy and Environment is carried in the ISI and SCOPUS listing of peer-reviewed journals, but its peer review process has been criticized for allowing the publication of substandard papers.[2][3] Numerous climate skeptics and contrarians have published in the journal and these studies have later been quoted by Republican critics of global warming science such as Senator James Inhofe and Congressman Joe Barton.[2]

Climate change skeptics who have been published in this journal include Sallie Baliunas, Patrick Michaels, Ross McKitrick, Stephen McIntyre, Ian Castles, Roger Pielke Jr., Willie Soon, Madhav Khandekar, Craig Loehle, Steve McIntyre, and Indur Goklany.

The current editor of Energy and Environment Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen admits in an article published online that "the journal I edit has tried to keep this debate [climate scepticism] alive"[4] She also states elsewhere I'm following my political agenda -- a bit, anyway," ... "But isn't that the right of the editor?"[5]

Substandard all the way. However, like so many other papers of this ilk, states 'natural variations' then fails to state the drivers of those variations. When you have a period of lower Total Solar irradiance, strong La Nina's, weak to moderate El Nino's, yet still have nine of the ten warmest years on record, then there is something other than 'natural variation' driving that warming.

 

[mamooth]

You are so far detached from reality, that its troubling to witness it. YES BOATLOADS..

Backing off from "MEGAtons", I see. Given that the marijuana consumption of the whole USA is around 20,000 tons a year, megatons of drugs by sea would have been quite a trick.

Or did you miss the factoid about 30% of Baltimore black males being certified addicts. Ask the Union leadership of the Border Patrol what happens to whistle blowers asserting that boatloads and trainloads of drugs are allowed to pass.Or ask the thousands of folks dying at ISIS hand if they consider them just the "JV team".

Ooga-booga! Scary black men! Ooga-booga! Mexicans! Ooga-booga! ISIS!

Sad part is -- you did this to yourself and I cant help you. Because when you take the positions you do on all of this -- all that one could possibly do is flail and incoherently babble.

Now that reality has so thoroughly smacked down your "The current warming is a response to the step input of solar activity increasing 40 years ago" theory, did you have a plan B? Okay, ooga-booga was plan B. Did you have a plan C?

Your theory would require temperature respond with a curve that is asymptotic to a new equilibrium temperature. And that's not happening. Temperature is shooting up, not leveling off. Hence, your theory is disproven, as it is contradicted by the observed data.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, Spring 2005, Vol. 7, Issue 4.
©Centre for Military and Strategic Studies, Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute, 2005.

THE NORTHWEST PASSAGE SHIPPING CHANNEL:
SOVEREIGNTY FIRST AND FORE MOST AND SOVEREIGNTY TO THE SIDE

Andrea Charron, PhD student, Royal Military College

The Northwest Passage (the Passage) is a series of seven channels that link the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The Passage could represent a seven thousand kilometre (7,000 km) shorter route between Europe and Asia from
the current route through the Panama Canal. The difficulty is that the Northwest Passage is frozen and impassable for surface vessels for the majority of the year. Even in the summer months the Passage is only open for a few weeks to ice-strengthened vessels, whose captain and crew must have nerves of steel.

What Billy Boob stated;

"The northwest passage has been ice free and navigable most every year since the early 1900's according to Naval researchers who have studied it and its strategic importance to the region."

Billy Boob, your own source gives lie to another 'fact' you have pulled out of your ass.

It has been open for as long a record keeping has been kept during summer months.. Do you have reading comprehension problems? Mr Mann is that you?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The AGW Faithers and Hoaxers deliberately try to conflate the language, too.

One can deny the A in AGW without denying that climate is changing.

Climate is always changing.

Fuck sake, the AGW Faithers don't even believe in global warming. They now prefer the much more neutral "climate CHANGE."

I fully agree that the climate changes. I don't see any good scientific basis to claim that humans cause it (for the most part) or that we have any significant chance of doing diddly shit ABOUT it.

In fact, it seems to smack of massive (baseless) hubris to imagine that human beings yet have any appreciable ability to modify climate or climate change.

 

[Billy_Bob]

There's actually people who want to parse the headline when what the C.I.C. told the cadets was hysterically exaggerated. Not border control. Not keeping terrorists off our shores or intercepting the MEGAtons of dope coming in by sea. Go Ctrl-F yourself Oopty Doodle.. Climate mentioned 28 times, about 30% of his address.

Drugs --- mentioned once.

Yes, the grownups are focusing on reality, and that's causing denier meltdowns. FOX has been leading the mass bedwetting over ISIS for a while, and WUWT has officially jumped on to that very drippy bandwagon. It will soon be a mandated state-of-mind for all conservatives.

The phrase for it is "ooga-booga tactics". It's nearly impossible to take someone seriously if they fall for ooga-booga. Or if someone declares with a straight face that MEGAtons of drugs are arriving by sea, for that matter. That's taking innumeracy to new heights.



I don't think ooga-booga is a viable strategy in the long run, for conservatism or denialism. Can they really maintain that level of terror until the election?

I'm glad to have a CIC who calmly focuses on actual threats instead of ooga-boogaing, and who works on preventing problems before they happen. And the military certainly agrees, as they take global warming very seriously. I guess the military is now part of the socialist plot.

You are so far detached from reality, that its troubling to witness it. YES BOATLOADS.. Or did you miss the factoid about 30% of Baltimore black males being certified addicts.

Ask the Union leadership of the Border Patrol what happens to whistle blowers asserting that boatloads and trainloads of drugs are allowed to pass. Or ask the thousands of folks dying at ISIS hand if they consider them just the "JV team"..

Sad part is -- you did this to yourself and I cant help you. Because when you take the positions you do on all of this -- all that one could possibly do is flail and incoherently babble..

I'm sure YOU wont read it. But former lead IPCC author Dr. P. Lloyd -- just published a study that shows how badly you have to act spastic.

An Estimate of The Centennial Variability of Global Temperatures

Philip J. Lloyd

• Abstract
  
• References
  
• PDF

Abstract
There has been widespread investigation of the drivers of changes in global temperatures. However, there has been remarkably little consideration of the magnitude of the changes to be expected over a period of a few decades or even a century. To address this question, the Holocene records up to 8000 years before present, from several ice cores were examined. The differences in temperatures between all records which are approximately a century apart were determined, after any trends in the data had been removed. The differences were close to normally distributed. The average standard deviation of temperature was 0.98 ± 0.27 °C. This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was due to natural variations.

And many of these people have just recently discovered the ENSO and ocean oscillations. They are waking up to the fact that CO2 cant do squat beyond its original 1-1 relationship. The recent paper by Dr Sang Ki-Lee just shreds the CAGW meme into confetti..

At the end of the 20th century, climate scientists noticed what they thought at first was an anomaly: a slowdown in the pace of global warming in the lower atmosphere. Today, it is a recognized trend that has lasted more than 15 years. Perplexed, oceanographers are on a hunt to find where this missing heat has gone.

In the latest report out of Nature Geoscience this week, University of Miami physical oceanographer Sang-Ki Lee and colleagues may have found some of this missing heat: The Pacific Ocean is keeping its cool by sending heat over to the Indian Ocean. This heat redistribution, the researchers say, could play a role in regulating the rate of global warming.

Source

This is also why the current El Moki will not gin up into a full fledged El Nino and may fall rapidly into a La Nina this fall.

 

[mamooth]

It has been open for as long a record keeping has been kept during summer months.. Do you have reading comprehension problems? Mr Mann is that you?

You're taking your "just make crazy stuff up" tactics to new heights here.

If you're not lying, show us these records of how the northwest passage has been ice-free and open for merchant shipping every year in the historical record.

Since every person here on the forum knows you're lying, why do you do it?

 

[Billy_Bob]

It has been open for as long a record keeping has been kept during summer months.. Do you have reading comprehension problems? Mr Mann is that you?

You're taking your "just make crazy stuff up" tactics to new heights here.

If you're not lying, show us these records of how the northwest passage has been ice-free and open for merchant shipping every year in the historical record.

Since every person here on the forum knows you're lying, why do you do it?

Poor little hairball cant find its ass to save itself.. You call me a liar.. NOW PROVE IT. This should be amusing.. to watch the little hair ball lie through its ass to save it.

 

[jc456]

The AGW Faithers and Hoaxers deliberately try to conflate the language, too.

One can deny the A in AGW without denying that climate is changing.

Climate is always changing.

Fuck sake, the AGW Faithers don't even believe in global warming. They now prefer the much more neutral "climate CHANGE."

I fully agree that the climate changes. I don't see any good scientific basis to claim that humans cause it (for the most part) or that we have any significant chance of doing diddly shit ABOUT it.

In fact, it seems to smack of massive (baseless) hubris to imagine that human beings yet have any appreciable ability to modify climate or climate change.

Causality, causation, cause, nobody can prove it, nobody. haircut talks out his/her butt producing more carbon than anyone.

 

[jc456]

Tooth, go to the post the experiment thread and show us your proof. If not, shut up already, it's old now your repeated hairlessness

 

[Wyld Kard]

Whether it's called global warming or climate change, it's nothing more then a massive lie and scam to push a political agenda to introduce more taxation, more regulations, and more government control all in the name of "saving the planet".

The lie and scam is sold to gullible people with the belief that it's mankind's fault and that it could be easily "fixed" by the very expensive process of "going green".

Nut-job warmists will say over and over that AGW/CC is real, and that it's a threat to the planet, and if nothing is done now it will be too late. What a load of crap.

If global destruction is on its way, a cataclysm of Biblical proportions, do we really think we can prevent it by "going green"?

 

[jc456]

I wish my peers would stop answering questions until the warmers answer ours

 

[Wyld Kard]

Demonstrate where any of this is being done, and who is doing it. Real scientfic papers, please, not blogs.

You have the audacity to request "real scientific papers" as evidence, when you still can't even back-up the crap that you claim with real scientific facts.

AGW/CC is a lie and a scam that you were just gullible and ignorant enough to fall for.

 

[Crick]

You could quite easily be buried in "real scientific papers" that support AGW. Check the resources used to produce the last IPCC AR.

 

[jc456]

You could quite easily be buried in "real scientific papers" that support AGW. Check the resources used to produce the last IPCC AR.

dude you perhaps should actually read it. it states that there has been little warming in the last 14 years. They made that statement; here:

from the IPCC AR5 Summary report:
"The observed reduction in surface warming trend over the period 1998 to 2012 as compared to the period 1951 to 2012, is due in roughly equal measure to a reduced trend in radiative forcing and a cooling contribution from natural internal variability, which includes a possible redistribution of heat within the ocean (medium confidence).
The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the timing of the downward phase of the 11-year solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing the reduced warming trend. There is medium confidence that natural internal decadal variability causes to a substantial degree the difference between observations and the simulations; the latter are not expected to reproduce the timing of natural internal variability. There may also be a contribution from forcing inadequacies and, in some models, an overestimate of the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing (dominated by the effects of aerosols)."

note their own lack of understanding by using words like 'possible'.

Meaning most all models were wrong, they expected to see much more warming trends. It didn't happen, still isn't happening and they can reconstruct datasets all they want, but we all know the numbers are inaccurate.

Then instead of making the recommendation to correct the models they still go with them and spout high confidence in them. hahahahahahaaha

So, wrong dude.

 

[Crick]

You could quite easily be buried in "real scientific papers" that support AGW. Check the resources used to produce the last IPCC AR.

dude you perhaps should actually read it. it states that there has been little warming in the last 14 years. They made that statement; here:

from the IPCC AR5 Summary report:
"The observed reduction in surface warming trend over the period 1998 to 2012 as compared to the period 1951 to 2012, is due in roughly equal measure to a reduced trend in radiative forcing and a cooling contribution from natural internal variability, which includes a possible redistribution of heat within the ocean (medium confidence).
The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the timing of the downward phase of the 11-year solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing the reduced warming trend. There is medium confidence that natural internal decadal variability causes to a substantial degree the difference between observations and the simulations; the latter are not expected to reproduce the timing of natural internal variability. There may also be a contribution from forcing inadequacies and, in some models, an overestimate of the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing (dominated by the effects of aerosols)."

note their own lack of understanding by using words like 'possible'.

Meaning most all models were wrong, they expected to see much more warming trends. It didn't happen, still isn't happening and they can reconstruct datasets all they want, but we all know the numbers are inaccurate.

Then instead of making the recommendation to correct the models they still go with them and spout high confidence in them. hahahahahahaaha

So, wrong dude.

So stupid, DUDE. You don't even understand what they said. You don't seem to understand the most basic concepts of science.

Why are you even here?

 

[Wyld Kard]

You could quite easily be buried in "real scientific papers" that support AGW. Check the resources used to produce the last IPCC AR.

 

[Billy_Bob]

You could quite easily be buried in "real scientific papers" that support AGW. Check the resources used to produce the last IPCC AR.

dude you perhaps should actually read it. it states that there has been little warming in the last 14 years. They made that statement; here:

from the IPCC AR5 Summary report:
"The observed reduction in surface warming trend over the period 1998 to 2012 as compared to the period 1951 to 2012, is due in roughly equal measure to a reduced trend in radiative forcing and a cooling contribution from natural internal variability, which includes a possible redistribution of heat within the ocean (medium confidence).
The reduced trend in radiative forcing is primarily due to volcanic eruptions and the timing of the downward phase of the 11-year solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of changes in radiative forcing in causing the reduced warming trend. There is medium confidence that natural internal decadal variability causes to a substantial degree the difference between observations and the simulations; the latter are not expected to reproduce the timing of natural internal variability. There may also be a contribution from forcing inadequacies and, in some models, an overestimate of the response to increasing greenhouse gas and other anthropogenic forcing (dominated by the effects of aerosols)."

note their own lack of understanding by using words like 'possible'.

Meaning most all models were wrong, they expected to see much more warming trends. It didn't happen, still isn't happening and they can reconstruct datasets all they want, but we all know the numbers are inaccurate.

Then instead of making the recommendation to correct the models they still go with them and spout high confidence in them. hahahahahahaaha

So, wrong dude.

So stupid, DUDE. You don't even understand what they said. You don't seem to understand the most basic concepts of science.

Why are you even here?

No Crick, He is representing the paper correctly. You however are placing your personal biases in front of what was actually presented.