Question for Algore supporters

[Old Rocks]

Is a warmer earth a wetter earth?

Depends on the spot.

It appears "some areas get drier, some get wetter" is more than your little brain can handle. That's why you're a denier.

Anyways, Gore Rule invoked in the OP. Whoever brings up Gore first admits to being a brainless cult loser, and thus forfeits the thread for their side. Thanks for playing, we have some lovely parting gifts for you, including the USMB home game.

Mamoooooooooo is a mooooooooron.....

Earth with a maximum surface temp of 30F - no atmospheric moisture
Earth with a minimum surface temp of 220f - all h2o is gas, boiled out the oceans

Earth today - in between
Earth during Jurassic - warmer and wetter


Thanks for playing

Are you actually good at science, or are you a

PARROTING MORON

Dumb ****, are you ever going to actually post something to back up your idiocy from a credible source? The Earth is not warming? Satellite data;

View attachment 504005

Oh, a color fudge chart!!!!

In 2005, the warmers fudged both the satellite and weather balloon data..... Which was highly correlated and showed precisely no warming.


Document how that data in that chart got in the chart. Was any of the data "corrected" or "adjusted?"

Your science invalid BEAKED BIRDBRAIN has no clue.....

That you don't know who Dr. Roy Spencer is, or how UAH gets it's data demonstrates the depth of your ignorance.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/06/uah-global-temperature-update-for-may-2021-0-08-deg-c/

 

[EMH]

Search for

NBC 2005 evaporates

And there it is...

The NBC article reminds us all that in 2005 both the satellites and the ballons showed NO WARMING in the atmosphere.

Hence, this guy's color chart is using the post 2005 FUDGE since the chart shows "warming" prior to 2005 that did not exist in the ACTUAL UNFUDGED DATA....

 

[mamooth]

Search for

NBC 2005 evaporates

That article points out deniers were using crap data analysis.

And here you are, 16 years later, still demanding that the crap data be used instead of the correct data.

Demanding that bad data be used instead of good is fraud. And it's what you're doing. Like I said, fraud is all you're capable of.

On the bright side, spending 16 years devoted to one fraud shows real devotion on your part. Your fraud cult will give you serious brownie points for that.

Earth with a maximum surface temp of 30F - no atmospheric moisture
Earth with a minimum surface temp of 220f - all h2o is gas, boiled out the oceans

Kook, just what in glub's name are you babbling about? We don't speak "moron", so you need to translate.

 

[EMH]

Crap data - highly correlated satellite and balloon data that proved increasing atmospheric co2 did not warm anything....

Non crap data - fudging both series with uncorrellated "corrections" so that there is now "warming" for the taxpayer funded fudge baking liars to sell to unimaginable morons in color charts...

 

[Old Rocks]

Search for

NBC 2005 evaporates

That article points out deniers were using crap data analysis.

And here you are, 16 years later, still demanding that the crap data be used instead of the correct data.

Demanding that bad data be used instead of good is fraud. And it's what you're doing. Like I said, fraud is all you're capable of.

On the bright side, spending 16 years devoted to one fraud shows real devotion on your part. Your fraud cult will give you serious brownie points for that.

Earth with a maximum surface temp of 30F - no atmospheric moisture
Earth with a minimum surface temp of 220f - all h2o is gas, boiled out the oceans

Kook, just what in glub's name are you babbling about? We don't speak "moron", so you need to translate.

EMH is another short bus denier that has never read peer reviewed scientific journals. His scientific views are completely dominated by political bullshit, therefore he understands nothing of science.