UH OH Spaghetti Oh! Hansen says the temps have been flat!

[ReallyMeow]

Except that CO2 does not trap heat. I believe that you believe it does so tell me, how do you believe CO2 traps heat.

Yes it does.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX4eOg2LaSY]Carbon Dioxide Trapping of Earth's Heat - A Laboratory Experiment - YouTube[/ame]

 

[westwall]

Except that CO2 does not trap heat. I believe that you believe it does so tell me, how do you believe CO2 traps heat.

Yes it does.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX4eOg2LaSY]Carbon Dioxide Trapping of Earth's Heat - A Laboratory Experiment - YouTube[/ame]

You've clearly never taken a physics class have you! That is an example of the IDEAL GAS LAWS in action! Do look them up, you might actually learn something, though I doubt it.

 

[Oddball]

Do those cycles explain what we are seeing? No, they're accounted for. Does the fact that carbon dioxide traps heat explain the warming that we have seen? Yes. Also, nu uh, you're stupid.

Actually, yes they do. There is NOTHING happening today that hasn't happened in the recent, moderate, and distant past. You anti-science revisionists ignore all that came before and claim that CO2 has some magical ability in defiance of every Law of Physics there is. And what warming praytell? There has neen NONE for 16 years or didn't you get the memo?

You clowns crack me up. You claim to be all about science and then you attempt to stifle every line of scientific enquiry that challenges your paradigm.

Guess what pal, that ain't science. That's a fanatical religion and you've been had....and you're so damned stupid you can't figure it out. What are you going to say in ten years time when no warming occurs and in fact the opposite does? You still going to blame warming for that?

What ignorant dupes you all are.

Just more of your ignorant, anti-science, denier cult twaddle, walleyed, you poor deluded retard. Go ahead and cling to your moronic myths about no warming. It would be interesting to hear the rationalizations you'll be spewing in ten years.

Helpful lifesaving hint: If you ever hear an announcement over the PA system for everyone to gather at the pavilion, don't go.

 

[RollingThunder]

Actually, yes they do. There is NOTHING happening today that hasn't happened in the recent, moderate, and distant past. You anti-science revisionists ignore all that came before and claim that CO2 has some magical ability in defiance of every Law of Physics there is. And what warming praytell? There has neen NONE for 16 years or didn't you get the memo?

You clowns crack me up. You claim to be all about science and then you attempt to stifle every line of scientific enquiry that challenges your paradigm.

Guess what pal, that ain't science. That's a fanatical religion and you've been had....and you're so damned stupid you can't figure it out. What are you going to say in ten years time when no warming occurs and in fact the opposite does? You still going to blame warming for that?

What ignorant dupes you all are.

Just more of your ignorant, anti-science, denier cult twaddle, walleyed, you poor deluded retard. Go ahead and cling to your moronic myths about no warming. It would be interesting to hear the rationalizations you'll be spewing in ten years.

Helpful lifesaving hint: If you ever hear an announcement over the PA system for everyone to gather at the pavilion, don't go.

You drank the kool-aid a long time ago, Screwball, or in your case maybe the 'kook-aid'.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Except that CO2 does not trap heat. I believe that you believe it does so tell me, how do you believe CO2 traps heat.

Yes it does.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX4eOg2LaSY]Carbon Dioxide Trapping of Earth's Heat - A Laboratory Experiment - YouTube[/ame]

You've clearly never taken a physics class have you! That is an example of the IDEAL GAS LAWS in action! Do look them up, you might actually learn something, though I doubt it.

Ok, you're half way there. now, that heat which otherwise was going to radiate back out into space, where is it now? Not in space.

 

[Saigon]

The myth:

Yes, the grand old man has finally been forced to admit that the last ten years have been flat, global tempwise, further he also admits that 2012 was the NINTH warmest on record.

Must suck to be a braindead propagandist like oltrakrtrollingblunderfraud and have the leader of the cult come out and say it's all been a lie.

But, being the nice little useful idiots they are, they'll figure out a way to rationalise it all away.

The reality:

2012 hottest year on record in contiguous U.S., NOAA says

Temperatures in the contiguous United States last year were the hottest in more than a century of record-keeping, shattering the mark set in 1998 by a wide margin, the federal government announced Tuesday.

2012 hottest year on record in contiguous U.S., NOAA says - Washington Post

 

[Saigon]

And globaly...


2012 expected to be ninth warmest year on record

World Meteorological Organisation data shows average global temperature to date is 14.45C, higher than long-term average. So far this year, the current world average global temperature is between one-tenth and a 0.5C higher than the 1961 to 1990 average.

Nine of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since 2001, according to the Met Office.

2012 expected to be ninth warmest year on record | Environment | guardian.co.uk

 

[SSDD]

Except that CO2 does not trap heat. I believe that you believe it does so tell me, how do you believe CO2 traps heat.

Yes it does.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX4eOg2LaSY]Carbon Dioxide Trapping of Earth's Heat - A Laboratory Experiment - YouTube[/ame]

Sorry guy, but that is not an experiment showing that CO2 can trap heat. As was pointed out to you, the experiment is an example of the ideal gas laws at work. Further, the experiment was rigged as the camera was set to only view a very narrow (even narrower than the CO2 absorption bands) section of the spectrum.

There are no actual experiments that demonstrate that CO2 can "trap" heat because it can not. There are experiments galore that demonstrate the variousl effects of the ideal gas laws which can easily fool the uneducated, but none that demonstrate a heat "trapping" property of CO2. You can't demonstrate in reality something that doesn't exist.

But feel free to describe how you believe CO2 can "trap" heat.

 

[SSDD]

Ok, you're half way there. now, that heat which otherwise was going to radiate back out into space, where is it now? Not in space.

Where do you believe it is? Do you believe the cool atmosphere can radiate heat back to the warmer surface of the earth when the 2nd law of thermodynamics says that this can not happen?

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

 

[SSDD]

The reality:

2012 hottest year on record in contiguous U.S., NOAA says

Temperatures in the contiguous United States last year were the hottest in more than a century of record-keeping, shattering the mark set in 1998 by a wide margin, the federal government announced Tuesday.

2012 hottest year on record in contiguous U.S., NOAA says - Washington Post

The actual reality:

According to CRN, the NOAA/NCDC state of the art meticulously placed temperature gathering network that DOES NOT require adjustment, 2012 was not the hottest year on record. Of course, you won't hear much about that in the mainstream. Further, you have to understand that NOAA/NASA/GISS, et. al, have been systematically lowering the temperature of the past for quite some time now. If you like, feel free to show me a record that has not been altered.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

None of the records have been altered. No one has ever suggested that they have been.

I can present results from a half dozen different sources for you - e.g. the UK Met Service, the Finnish Met Service, the Australian climate unit and so forth and so on.

They ALL conduct independent research, and they all draw very similar conclusions concerning local and global conditions.

You will ignore all of them. You know it and I know it.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

None of the records have been altered. No one has ever suggested that they have been.

I can present results from a half dozen different sources for you - e.g. the UK Met Service, the Finnish Met Service, the Australian climate unit and so forth and so on.

They ALL conduct independent research, and they all draw very similar conclusions concerning local and global conditions.

You will ignore all of them. You know it and I know it.

Of course they have. I am surprised that you don't know this. Here, have a gander at just a few examples of the blatant data tampering going on within climate science.

If you would like more, just ask. The examples are legion. The actual fact, siagon, is that none of the records in use are any longer trustworthy due to the amount of alteration, tampering, and blatant fabrication that have been done with them.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

Right. That really is just so convincing.

Not quite as convincing as the evidence that the Holocaust was faked, but still.

In all seriousness - do you actually believe this stuff yourself?

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

Right. That really is just so convincing.

Not quite as convincing as the evidence that the Holocaust was faked, but still.

In all seriousness - do you actually believe this stuff yourself?

I believe it, because I have gone to the records myself. There has been no attempt to hide it, or cover it up. The tampering is blatant. Feel free to go to the records yourself and prove any of the above examples incorrect.

What is particularly interesting is that you so offhandedly disregard such a serious charge. Clearly you have never looked and just as obviously, it has never occurred to you to look. You simply accept what you are told without question even when there isn't the first bit of actual evidence to support any of it.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

So why do you ignore the results of other research which confirms climate change, and the results of which have never been accused of fraud, tampering or anything else?

Why, for instance, do you refuse to use the UK Met Office as a source?

If I list 50 - and yes, I mean FIFTY - major scientific bodies who confirm climate change as a reality, will you explain why you ignore their research?

 

[SSDD]

SSDD -

So why do you ignore the results of other research which confirms climate change, and the results of which have never been accused of fraud, tampering or anything else?

Why, for instance, do you refuse to use the UK Met Office as a source?

If I list 50 - and yes, I mean FIFTY - major scientific bodies who confirm climate change as a reality, will you explain why you ignore their research?

I don't deny climate change. The climate is and has always been changing. What I am skeptical of is that man is in any way responsible for changes in the global climate.

As to the met office, I guess you missed the fact that they have recently revised down their numbers for projected warming.

You can list political heads of scientific bodies and academies that support the agw claims...you can't even begin to prove that the majority, or even close to the majority of the membership of those bodies are on the bandwagon. It would be easy to name 50 poliical front offices that support the hoax....you would find it much more difficult to name even 50 of the tens of thousands of members from each society, who does not depend on grant money who is on the AGW bandwagon.

Finding scientists who don't depend on grant money who are on the AGW bandwagon isn't an easy task.

 

[Saigon]

SSDD -

I am aware of around 50 scientific bodies which have confirmed mans role in climate change.

Can you tell us how many scientific bodies suggest that man is not involved in climate change?

 

[IanC]

SSDD -

I am aware of around 50 scientific bodies which have confirmed mans role in climate change.

Can you tell us how many scientific bodies suggest that man is not involved in climate change?

it seems like you only care about consensus and authority.

in that case then point out to me the mainstream sceptics who say that the globe has not warmed, or that mankind's production of CO2, etc has not made at least some impact? my 'authorities' are arguing completely different things than your strawman arguments imply that they are. complaining about the unexplained changes in so many temperature series is not the same as saying there has been no warming. pointing out that there has been little or no warming over the last 16 years is not saying that there was no warming in the '80s and 90's, it is pointing out that CO2 production in the last 16 years does not match the predicted increase in temps. the CAGW predictions are not matching up with reality. obviously there are unknown or misunderstood factors that need more study and the theory of CO2 warming needs, at the very least, some serious updating.

 

[Saigon]

Ian C -

We all care about scientific consensus.

There isn't a person on this board who wouldn't take the advice of 99 doctors over the advice of 1 doctor. To do is simply logical and sensible.

The fact that 50+ major scientific bodies confirm that human acitivity play a major role in climate change - while 1 scientific body has suggested some doubt tells us everything we need to know. It is exactly the same process as we came to know that smoking causes cancer and that Aids is linked to HIV. Exactly the same process.

There is no question that some early climate change scenarios were too alarmist - just as many others were not alarmist enough. That is how science works.

There is also no question that some years have been cooler than expected. Others have been warmer than expected. (Australia, for instance, recently recorded its hottest day EVER). This does not disprove climate change science, it only shows that climate is not 100% predictable.

 

[westwall]

Yes it does.
Carbon Dioxide Trapping of Earth's Heat - A Laboratory Experiment - YouTube

You've clearly never taken a physics class have you! That is an example of the IDEAL GAS LAWS in action! Do look them up, you might actually learn something, though I doubt it.

Ok, you're half way there. now, that heat which otherwise was going to radiate back out into space, where is it now? Not in space.

Seriously dude....take a science class. The people who put this little "experiment" together havn't a clue how to put one together and they certainly have never taken a high school physics class where these type of experiments are used all the time...well they were back in my day...clearly you youngsters are terribly defficient in scientific acumen.