Warmest March on record

[Old Rocks]

Those experiments have been performed many times.

I know you don't read these links, but here it is again...

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

YOU need to read replies to your posts.... I already covered the fallacy in that link page in my last post you ignored....

Its fudged from start to finish, I laid all this out for you in that post. So why don't you address that post instead of pretending it wasn't there and repeating the BS...

It is unimportant. There has been NO, I REPEAT, NO Increase in world wide temperatures since 1998. At that time the world temperature had registered an increase of a little over 1 Degree from 1900. Of course NOW temperatures will be higher then prior most of it not all of the 1900's, ONCE AGAIN, the temperature across the planet rose by a little over 1 degree from 1900.

Even a simpleton can grasp these concepts. Making me wonder what IQ ratings are for the Warmers?

Notice Chris, Old Rocks and the new fellow have NOT addressed the SCIENTIFIC FACT that world wide Temperatures have not risen since the end of 1998.

Really? The warmest decade on record. 2000 to 2009. The second warmest decade on record. 1990 to 1999. The third warmest decade on record, 1980 to 1989.

See a pattern there? And 2010 to 2019 will be warmer than all of the above.

1998 was the strongest El Nino on record. Yet, we are now looking at a year that may well eclipse that year with a moderate El Nino.

And we know what your IQ rating is, Sarge.

 

[gslack]

Okay first, water was the biggest one not CO2.. yeah water vapor just like we say all the time on this, clouds contribute more to warming than CO2 and whenever we do your side tries to shout it down and post more crap about CO2.
--------------------------------------

While that may be true, is it relevant? There's ALWAYS water vapor. AGW is concerned with the ADDED gases contributed by man. Besides, more heat would mean more vapor, therefore, more heat, therefore, more vapor, etc. etc., etc., illustrating the possible magnification of the effects of small amounts of other gases on the total global temperature.

MORON IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME THAN QUOTE ME CORRECTLY!

Your continued rudeness and disdain for using the accepted forum behavior on quoting is tiresome and completely asinine. If you can't figure it out ask someone, and if its just you wanting to be different grow up junior we are not amused.

Its entirely relevant! It was the OP source! And it was presented inaccurately. The fact is water vapor is the predominate factor in greenhouse gas effects on the planet.

And if you want to go to the core of the problem.... You stated above more heat leads to more water vapor. And we already know CO2 rise follows temperature rise. We are back to the original question; what causes the original warming? If we are to assume both CO2 and H2O are both greenhouse gases and they in fact do keep heat or UV radiation on the planet. Than we must ask where the original warming which lead to their increase is coming from. Well the only viable answer we know of right now is the Sun, solar variance, solar winds, sunspot activity, and cosmic rays or outside influences from other bodies in the solar system, galaxy, and universe.

Thats the real problem with this crap you guys push. Its all ignoring the original factor and blaming the effects.

Using the logic of the AGW sect....

We find the following signs of bad science.

1. A=B... if we have a problem like a changing climate, and we find a trace gas adding to the effects, than the trace gas must be the cause...

2, Causality ... As the planet warms the CO2 levels increase, water vapor increases, which causes more warming. Using AGW cult logic we ignore the original and most pertinent question of what caused the warming and focus on one of its effects and blame it.

Now look moron either follow the thread and comment with some understanding of whats going on or don't. But don't troll like an idiot..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why? We have raised the level of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40% and now are seeing a steady increase in temperature. Seems that we have done a pretty definative experiment.

Repeat it in a lab. Take one tank with Earth Atmosphere take a second with a 40% increase, not 40% CO2, and see if temperatures increase by the 1.3 degrees you're supposing.

Just one time!

One repeatable experiment, just one!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

YOU need to read replies to your posts.... I already covered the fallacy in that link page in my last post you ignored....

Its fudged from start to finish, I laid all this out for you in that post. So why don't you address that post instead of pretending it wasn't there and repeating the BS...

It is unimportant. There has been NO, I REPEAT, NO Increase in world wide temperatures since 1998. At that time the world temperature had registered an increase of a little over 1 Degree from 1900. Of course NOW temperatures will be higher then prior most of it not all of the 1900's, ONCE AGAIN, the temperature across the planet rose by a little over 1 degree from 1900.

Even a simpleton can grasp these concepts. Making me wonder what IQ ratings are for the Warmers?

Notice Chris, Old Rocks and the new fellow have NOT addressed the SCIENTIFIC FACT that world wide Temperatures have not risen since the end of 1998.

Really? The warmest decade on record. 2000 to 2009. The second warmest decade on record. 1990 to 1999. The third warmest decade on record, 1980 to 1989.

See a pattern there? And 2010 to 2019 will be warmer than all of the above.

1998 was the strongest El Nino on record. Yet, we are now looking at a year that may well eclipse that year with a moderate El Nino.

And we know what your IQ rating is, Sarge.

And yet no raise in world wide temps, go figure, or link to the statement showing I am wrong.

 

[Old Rocks]

OK, gslack, I will speak to you as if you were someone that I worked with.

When you have real information, and referances for it, I will pay attention. Otherwise, you have been a waste of time, and I will not waste time on your nonsense any longer.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

OK, gslack, I will speak to you as if you were someone that I worked with.

When you have real information, and referances for it, I will pay attention. Otherwise, you have been a waste of time, and I will not waste time on your nonsense any longer.

Waste of time, you ADMITTED last year that no increase has occurred since 1998. Go ahead do what you are asking for, PROVIDE the data supporting your claim that temperatures world wide have risen since 1998.

 

[Old Rocks]

Instrumental temperature record - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All the links you could wish in this one article.

 

[gslack]

Why? We have raised the level of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40% and now are seeing a steady increase in temperature. Seems that we have done a pretty definative experiment.

No dumazz, we see the CO2 levels rose as the planet warmed, just like at any other time in history.... CO2 is an effect not an original cause. Planet warms, CO2 and water vapor levels increase, and the added factors of increased CO2 and water vapor adds to that warming effect and hold us in a warming trend longer than we would have without them. Again those are effects of the original warming and not the cause of it.

 

[gslack]

OK, gslack, I will speak to you as if you were someone that I worked with.

When you have real information, and referances for it, I will pay attention. Otherwise, you have been a waste of time, and I will not waste time on your nonsense any longer.

Translation: Oldsocks has no time for logic and anything that requires him to think. He has a very tight schedule of propaganda posting. He gets his knowledge from the "experts" already pre-packaged and ready for safe consumption.

We went over your BS claims and wordplay used to claim decades warmer or whatnot didn't we? Yeah we did....

NASA GISS: Research News: 2009: Second Warmest Year on Record; End of Warmest Decade

2009: Second Warmest Year on Record; End of Warmest Decade

Jan. 21, 2010

2009 was tied for the second warmest year in the modern record, a new NASA analysis of global surface temperature shows. The analysis, conducted by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City, also shows that in the Southern Hemisphere, 2009 was the warmest year since modern records began in 1880.

Although 2008 was the coolest year of the decade, due to strong cooling of the tropical Pacific Ocean, 2009 saw a return to near-record global temperatures. The past year was only a fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, the warmest year on record, and tied with a cluster of other years — 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2007 1998 and 2007 — as the second warmest year since recordkeeping began.

THe bold part tells the tale all too clearly..... 2005 was the warmest year on record (since 1880) and 2009 is tied with 1998, 2002, 2003, 2006 and 2007 as the second warmest on record.....

So its in a 5 way tie for second warmest since 1880? LOL, dude you sure its even warming?

HAHHAHAHAHAA! I bet its in a 10 way tie for the wildest stretch to prove AGW in the past 10 years...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why? We have raised the level of CO2 in our atmosphere by 40% and now are seeing a steady increase in temperature. Seems that we have done a pretty definative experiment.

You know that's not science.

 

[Patriot214]

What about prior to 1880? We have 130 years of temperature records to attempt to prove man-made global warming; but what about the 4.5 billion year life span of our planet? Was the earth's global temperature steady for billions of years, then we pollute for 100 years and it increases?

Layers of snowfall extracted from the arctic provided excellent data for temperature records and CO2 levels over the past 400-500,000 years. They concluded that, during this time, the earth had experienced approximately a dozen warming periods as well as a dozen cooling periods. Strange, considering SUV's, private jets and evil corporations were non-existent then. There is a major difference between global warming and "man-made" global warming. Our global temperature varies. But, it is natural.

 

[Old Rocks]

What about prior to 1880? We have 130 years of temperature records to attempt to prove man-made global warming; but what about the 4.5 billion year life span of our planet? Was the earth's global temperature steady for billions of years, then we pollute for 100 years and it increases?

Layers of snowfall extracted from the arctic provided excellent data for temperature records and CO2 levels over the past 400-500,000 years. They concluded that, during this time, the earth had experienced approximately a dozen warming periods as well as a dozen cooling periods. Strange, considering SUV's, private jets and evil corporations were non-existent then. There is a major difference between global warming and "man-made" global warming. Our global temperature varies. But, it is natural.

Strange that you are so damned ignorant.

The ice core record, from the Antarctic, go back accurately, about 650,000 years. There are cores being studied right now that will extend this a bit further. However, at no time in that period has the CO2 been above 300 ppm, nor CH4 above 1000 ppb. We are above 385 ppm of CO2 right now, with 1800 ppb of CH4. On top of that we have introduced many millions of tons of industrial GHGs, some of which are 10,000 to 20,000 times as effective GHGs as CO2.

We are past the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2.

Science: CO2 levels haven’t been this high for 15 million years, when it was 5° to 10°F warmer and seas were 75 to 120 feet higher — “We have shown that this dramatic rise in sea level is associated with an increase in CO2 levels

You would have to go back at least 15 million years to find carbon dioxide levels on Earth as high as they are today, a UCLA scientist and colleagues report Oct. 8 in the online edition of the journal Science.

“The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,” said the paper’s lead author, Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

 

[Dr Gregg]

you're not convincing anyone, dumbfuck.

of course, close minded people have made up their minds and don't care about a little thing called facts and scientific evidence

 

[Big Fitz]

Only 'highly' educated people are so smart they can ignore common sense and logic and talk themselves into any damn fool thing they put their mind to.

 

[gslack]

What about prior to 1880? We have 130 years of temperature records to attempt to prove man-made global warming; but what about the 4.5 billion year life span of our planet? Was the earth's global temperature steady for billions of years, then we pollute for 100 years and it increases?

Layers of snowfall extracted from the arctic provided excellent data for temperature records and CO2 levels over the past 400-500,000 years. They concluded that, during this time, the earth had experienced approximately a dozen warming periods as well as a dozen cooling periods. Strange, considering SUV's, private jets and evil corporations were non-existent then. There is a major difference between global warming and "man-made" global warming. Our global temperature varies. But, it is natural.

Strange that you are so damned ignorant.

The ice core record, from the Antarctic, go back accurately, about 650,000 years. There are cores being studied right now that will extend this a bit further. However, at no time in that period has the CO2 been above 300 ppm, nor CH4 above 1000 ppb. We are above 385 ppm of CO2 right now, with 1800 ppb of CH4. On top of that we have introduced many millions of tons of industrial GHGs, some of which are 10,000 to 20,000 times as effective GHGs as CO2.

We are past the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2.

Science: CO2 levels haven’t been this high for 15 million years, when it was 5° to 10°F warmer and seas were 75 to 120 feet higher — “We have shown that this dramatic rise in sea level is associated with an increase in CO2 levels

You would have to go back at least 15 million years to find carbon dioxide levels on Earth as high as they are today, a UCLA scientist and colleagues report Oct. 8 in the online edition of the journal Science.

“The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,” said the paper’s lead author, Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

YOU IGNORED THE POINTING OUT OF TROUBLE IN YOUR OWN POSTS AGAIN!!!!

What a pathetic example of non-science ..... YOu have just shown once again you are a algorian faithful and NOT a scientist or even someone interested in the actual science...

The very place you claim your blogs get data from says something that all but refutes all of what your green blogs say and you ignore it like a punk.... Pathetic, truly pathetic...

 

[gslack]

you're not convincing anyone, dumbfuck.

of course, close minded people have made up your minds and don't care about a little thing called facts and scientific evidence

You would know about close mindedness wouldn't you fake...

 

[gslack]

What about prior to 1880? We have 130 years of temperature records to attempt to prove man-made global warming; but what about the 4.5 billion year life span of our planet? Was the earth's global temperature steady for billions of years, then we pollute for 100 years and it increases?

Layers of snowfall extracted from the arctic provided excellent data for temperature records and CO2 levels over the past 400-500,000 years. They concluded that, during this time, the earth had experienced approximately a dozen warming periods as well as a dozen cooling periods. Strange, considering SUV's, private jets and evil corporations were non-existent then. There is a major difference between global warming and "man-made" global warming. Our global temperature varies. But, it is natural.

Strange that you are so damned ignorant.

The ice core record, from the Antarctic, go back accurately, about 650,000 years. There are cores being studied right now that will extend this a bit further. However, at no time in that period has the CO2 been above 300 ppm, nor CH4 above 1000 ppb. We are above 385 ppm of CO2 right now, with 1800 ppb of CH4. On top of that we have introduced many millions of tons of industrial GHGs, some of which are 10,000 to 20,000 times as effective GHGs as CO2.

We are past the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2.

Science: CO2 levels haven’t been this high for 15 million years, when it was 5° to 10°F warmer and seas were 75 to 120 feet higher — “We have shown that this dramatic rise in sea level is associated with an increase in CO2 levels

You would have to go back at least 15 million years to find carbon dioxide levels on Earth as high as they are today, a UCLA scientist and colleagues report Oct. 8 in the online edition of the journal Science.

“The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,” said the paper’s lead author, Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

OMG!!!!!

Dude twice now in as many days you have been caught red-handed lying about what an article you link to states...... DO you have any excuse at all for this?

Above you said this, either in regards to the article claims or you just wanted to make crap up.....

"We are past the equivelant of 450 ppm of CO2."

Your words... Correct??? Of ocurse they are we can see that just above and in the post in question. You said that and that was your claim....

The article YOU linked to as reference or to give weight to your claim.

Science: CO2 levels haven’t been this high for 15 million years, when it was 5° to 10°F warmer and seas were 75 to 120 feet higher — “We have shown that this dramatic rise in sea level is associated with an increase in CO2 levels

The article says a lot of things and after reading it carefully I found the only mention of that 450 ppm to be here in this statement....

"So we need to keep atmospheric concentrations of CO2 as low as possible — and if we do go above 450 ppm, we need to get back to under 350 ppm as rapidly as possible, preferably by century’s end, though that would be no easy feat."

WTF man? You going to outright lie like that you shameless pig???

The only real reference to today's actual ppm was much later when they said this....

“A slightly shocking finding,” Tripati said, “is that the only time in the last 20 million years that we find evidence for carbon dioxide levels similar to the modern level of 387 parts per million was 15 to 20 million years ago, when the planet was dramatically different.”

Now you lowlife lying little hack! You are a proven and documented liar and completely unethical POS.... YOU deliberately lied again just like before over the qualifications of the AMS certification.

You are going to be remembered by me for this instance for as long as I am a member here. Twice I have caught you lying intentionally to push your BS agenda on people..... Good day to you sir....

 

[konradv]

Was the earth's global temperature steady for billions of years, then we pollute for 100 years and it increases?
-----------------------------------

No it wasn't, but that's irrelevant. We're concerned about the climate under which humans evolved, relatively cool compared to some earlier times, and would like to keep it that way. Sure the earth will survive and go back to its own ways regardless, but WILL WE? Increased gases trap more solar radiation. More radiation means more heat. The concern of AGW believers is that the ADDED gases that are the result of man will upset the balance under which humans have thrived.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Again I ask, can the Wamers give us a single repeatable laboratory experiment demonstrating that 450PP of CO2 causing a 5 to 10 degree increase in temperature?

I'll let you go to 1,000 even 2,000 PPM.

Show us the real science behind your hypothesis

 

[konradv]

I'd like you to acknowledge that the question has been already answered, but honesty isn't usually the deniers' forte. Showing that CO2 traps radiation is a SIMPLE lab experiment. It's already been done millions of times. More CO2 means more trapped radiation. What more do you need???