Why is it?

Way to go Joe, start deflecting off the issue again when your argument starts failing. Clean energy is only making Obama's filthy rich, richer, while making the most in poverty ever. I guess when your lights are turned off, because there is only enough for the liberal elites, then you can start bitching about how unfair your life is. Of course it is too late by then but Obama and his liberal elites will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Dude, again, you are babbling...

Besides, we are going to be sending you Conservatards to Re-education camps, and that will save a shitload of money.
You know you aren't helping out this planet by keeping your sorry ass on it. Come on start reducing the CO2 by showing the rest of US how it is done. The Great Lakes are right near where you live, go out to the middle of it and take a dive in the deep end. Chicken shits like you are the reason why Global Warming is still around, nothing but hot air.
 
You know you aren't helping out this planet by keeping your sorry ass on it. Come on start reducing the CO2 by showing the rest of US how it is done. The Great Lakes are right near where you live, go out to the middle of it and take a dive in the deep end. Chicken shits like you are the reason why Global Warming is still around, nothing but hot air.

Naw, again, better to get rid of all the useless eaters in the Red States, comrade!
 
Way to go Joe, start deflecting off the issue again when your argument starts failing. Clean energy is only making Obama's filthy rich, richer, while making the most in poverty ever. I guess when your lights are turned off, because there is only enough for the liberal elites, then you can start bitching about how unfair your life is. Of course it is too late by then but Obama and his liberal elites will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Dude, again, you are babbling...

Besides, we are going to be sending you Conservatards to Re-education camps, and that will save a shitload of money.
Come and get me
 
You know you aren't helping out this planet by keeping your sorry ass on it. Come on start reducing the CO2 by showing the rest of US how it is done. The Great Lakes are right near where you live, go out to the middle of it and take a dive in the deep end. Chicken shits like you are the reason why Global Warming is still around, nothing but hot air.

Naw, again, better to get rid of all the useless eaters in the Red States, comrade!
tough Internet guys make me laugh keep going Hulkster
 
Unlike you, I have examined every piece of evidence that I could get my hands on for the past couple of decades...Being a critical thinker, there is nothing else I could have done.

I think you spelled "Retard" wrong.

First...I never used the word...Second, I don't think you are retarded...I think you are stupid and a dupe as evidenced by your belief in AGW without the first bit of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in support of the hypothesis.
 
It is already established that you are one of the 3 worst liars on the board hairball...and when you claim anything, we all know it is a lie.

So, I wrote a long piece debunking all of your lies. In responses, you had another meltdown and ran.

Sorry hairball..but again you lie...but then what else would we expect from you?

You said you had hundreds of paper showing predictions of cooling.

Post them. That is, if you really do have them, and you weren't lying.

No problem hairball...unlike you, I am not a liar and don't make claims I can't back up. Stupid of you to actually ask for them...I was content to simply state that they exist...now you have requested me to name them and provide links all in one place....you think other skeptics won't be all over these papers...they will never stop haunting you....stupid...yes...but then stupid is what you do best...right hairball?

Here is the first hundred or so...when you get ready for the next hundred, just ask...and after that there are even more...

Kukla, 1972
Ellsaesser , 1974
Cimorelli and House, 1974
Ellsaesser, 1975
Agee, 1980
Benton, 1970
National Academy of Sciences
Hare, 1971
Gribbin, 1975
NOAA, 1974
Flohn, 1974
Stewart and Glantz, 1985
Curry, 1969
Denton and Karlén, 1977
Denton and Karlén, 1973
Potter et al., 1981
Brinkmann, 1979
Wright, 1972
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency,1974
.S. Central Intelligence Agency, 1974
Robock, 1978
Magill, 1980
Bryson and Wendland, 1975
Karl et al., 1984
Hoffert and Flannery, 1985
Schneider, 1974
Bradley and Miller, 1972
Collis, 1975
Haber, 1974
Ghil, 1975
Wahl, 1968
Fairbridge, 1972
Eichenlaub, 1970
Budyko, 1969
Hughs, 1970
Fletcher, 1970
Thompson, 1975
Fletcher, 1968
Schneider, 1978
Sanchez and Kutzbach, 1974
Moran and Morgan, 1977
Gates, 1976
Andrews et al., 1972
Potter et al., 1975
Allen et al., 1976
Ya-feng et al., 1978
McCormick and Ludwig, 1967
Lozek, 1972
Mitchell, 1971
Shultz and Hillerud, 1978
Kukla and Gavin, 1981
Norwine, 1977
Reitan, 1974
Schneider and Dickinson, 1974
Kukla and Kukla, 1972
Sancetta et al., 1972
Bodhaine and Pueshel, 1973
King and Willis, 1975
Idso, 1982
Chaston, 1980
Skeeter, 1985
Arrigo, 1982
Lamb, 1966
Gordon, 1981
Starr and Oort, 1973
Barry, 1977
Wahl and Lawson, 1970
Thompson, 1977
Absolon, 1972
Lentfer, 1972
Palmer, 1973
Angell and Korshover, 1977
Bryson and Ross, 1977
Newell, 1974
What and Bryson, 1975
Gordon, 1980
Williams, 1978
Barrett, 1971
Mörner, 1972
Miles, 1978
Verma et al., 1984
Borisov, 1969
Flecher, 1969
Battan, 1970
Hollin, 1969
Holden and Ehrlich 1971
Kalnicky, 1974
Kotlyakov, 1980
Yamamoto et al., 1977
Kelly et al., 1982
Benson, 1962
Eichenlaub, 1971
Schultz, 1972
Landsberg, 1976
Paterson, 1977
Angell and Korshover, 1978
Collis, 1975
Griggs, 1973
Mitchell, 1970

Oh, I see the problem. You don't have them. You were lying.

what you should see is that everyone isn't a liar like you.
 
Way to go Joe, start deflecting off the issue again when your argument starts failing. Clean energy is only making Obama's filthy rich, richer, while making the most in poverty ever. I guess when your lights are turned off, because there is only enough for the liberal elites, then you can start bitching about how unfair your life is. Of course it is too late by then but Obama and his liberal elites will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Dude, again, you are babbling...

Besides, we are going to be sending you Conservatards to Re-education camps, and that will save a shitload of money.


"We"??? Your ass will be cowering behind a couch hoping that your beloved "gubermint" protects you because you are compliant. You, my leftard friend, are a gutless, cowardly piece of shit.
 
Here is the first hundred or so...when you get ready for the next hundred, just ask...and after that there are even more...

Excellent. I knew you'd eventually walk into the trap. That is, you'd post a faked list, and I'd get to bust you as a fraud. Ah, life is good.

Checking all 100 was too tall an order, so I started going down your list until I got 20 actual scientific papers. I skimmed them all to find what they predicted.

3 predicted cooling.
14 made no predictions.
3 predicted warming.

So, liar, you got some splainin' to do. Why did you claim all 20 studies predicted cooling, when only 3 of them did, and 3 actually predicted warming?

I think everyone knows the answer. You went to a cult website, copied their list and pasted it here. You didn't look at any of the studies yourself. You just threw them out there, pretended they predicted cooling, and hoped nobody would check up on you. Too bad for you that I'm always here to bust your frauds. You're not the most dishonest person on this board, but you're in the top few.

The point? Anyone who says the 1970s studies were mostly predicting cooling is lying, like SSDD just got caught doing.

Kukla, 1972
(1)Yep, one of the few predicting cooling. No wonder you put it first.

Ellsaesser , 1974
(2)A study that pointed out CO2 caused warming, but particulates caused cooling, and did not make a prediction on the outcome. Not a prediction of cooling.

Cimorelli and House, 1974
(3)A model showing cooling if particulates increased fourfold. Did not attempt to forecast the real world, so not a prediction of cooling.

Ellsaesser, 1975
(4)More on particulates. Makes no prediction.

Agee, 1980
(5)Predicts warming.

Benton, 1970
(6)Points out that CO2 warms and particulates cool, and makes no prediction.

National Academy of Sciences
Makes no specific prediction, and mentions humans are having a warming effect. Not a scientific paper, so no score.

Hare, 1971
(7)Makes no prediction.

Gribbin, 1975
(8)Paywalled text, but "The Jupiter Effect" sci-fi pulp science writer Gribbin loved weird alarmist theories, so it probably did predict cooling.

NOAA, 1974
Not a scientific paper.

Flohn, 1974
(9)About long term glacial cycles. Not a prediction of cooling.

Stewart and Glantz, 1985
(10)No prediction of cooling.

Curry, 1969

(11)No prediction.

Denton and Karlén, 1977

(12)No prediction.

Denton and Karlén, 1973

(13)Predicted warming.

Potter et al., 1981

(14)No prediction.

Brinkmann, 1979
(15)No prediction.

Wright, 1972

(16)Only predicted long term glacial cycles, so not a cooling prediction.

U.S. Central Intelligence Agency,1974
Not a scientific paper.

U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, 1974
Not a scientific paper.

Robock, 1978

(17)No prediction.

Magill, 1980

Not a scientific paper.

Bryson and Wendland, 1975

(18)Bryson, so of course it predicted cooling.

Karl et al., 1984

(19)No prediction.

Hoffert and Flannery, 1985

(20)Very emphatically predicted warming.
 
[

The lying just never stops with you does it hairball?...Of course no one would expect any different from you. And while I am not interested enough to go through your lies this time item by item, I will point out some of the most egregious ones.. For example

hairball said:
Agee, 1980
(5)Predicts warming.

[Agee, 1980]
Evidence has been presented and discussed to show a cooling trend over the Northern Hemisphere since around 1940, amounting to over 0.5°C, due primarily to cooling at mid- and high latitudes. Some regions of the middle latitudes have actually warmed while others, such as the central and eastern United States, have experienced sharp cooling. A representative station for this latter region is Lafayette, Ind., which has recorded a drop of 2.2°C in its mean annual temperature from 1940 through 1978. The cooling trend for the Northern Hemisphere has been associated with an increase of both the latitudinal gradient of temperature and the lapse rate, as predicted by climate models with decreased solar input and feedback mechanisms. … Observations and interpretation of sunspot activity have been used to infer a direct thermal response of terrestrial temperature to solar variability on the time scale of the Gleissberg cycle (∼90 years, an amplitude of the 11-year cycles). Measurements at the Greenwich Observatory and the Kitt Peak National Observatory, as well as other supportive information and arguments, are presented to hypothesize a physical link between the sunspot activity and the solar parameter. On the time scale of the Gleissberg cycle when the mean annual sunspot number exceeds 50 it is proposed that global cooling may be initiated due to the decreased insolation. This is also supported by umbral-to-penumbral ratios computed and interpreted by Hoyt (1979a).

hairball said:
National Academy of Sciences
Makes no specific prediction, and mentions humans are having a warming effect. Not a scientific paper, so no score.

A paper from the national academy of sciences is not a scientific paper...what an idiot...take a look at some of the crap you and yours post up as scientific papers and realize how stupid you actually are. As to what the paper actually says:

National Academy of Sciences said:
A striking feature of the instrumental record is the behavior of tem-perature worldwide. As shown by Mitchell (1970), the average surfaceair temperature in the northern hemisphere increased from the 1880'suntil about 1940 and has been decreasing thereafter (see Figure A. 6,Appendix A). Starr and Oort (1973) have reported that, during the period 1958-1963, the hemisphere's (mass-weighted) mean tempera-ture decreased by about 0.6 °C. In that period the polar and subtropicalarid regions experienced the greatest cooling.

There seems little doubt that the present period of unusual warmth will eventually give way to a timeof colder climate, but there is no consensus with regard to either the
magnitude or rapidity of the transition. The onset of this climatic de-cline could be several thousand years in the future, although there is a finite probability that a serious worldwide cooling could befall the earth within the next hundred years.


Same for your claims that papers from NOAA are not scientific papers...maybe true today, but not in the 70's

hairball said:
NOAA, 1974
Not a scientific paper.

NOAA 1974 said:
In the Sahelian zone of Africa south of the Sahara, the countries of Chad, The Gambia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, and Upper Volta are enduring a drought that in some areas has been going on for more than six years now, following some 40 previous years of abundant monsoon rainfall. And the drought is spreading—eastward into Ehtiopia and southward into Dahomey, Egypt, Guinea, Kenya, Nigeria, Somalia, Tanzania, and Zaire. … Many climatologists have associated this drought and other recent weather anomalies with a global cooling trend and changes in atmospheric circulation which, if prolonged, pose serious threats to major food-producing regions of the world.Annual average temperatures over the Northern Hemisphere increased rather dramatically from about 1890 through 1940, but have been falling ever since. The total change has averaged about one-half degree Centigrade, with the greatest cooling in higher latitudes. A drop of only one or two degrees Centigrade in the annual average temperature at higher latitudes can shorten the growing season so that some crops have to be abandoned. … [T]he average growing season in England is already two weeks shorter than it was before 1950. Since the late 1950’s, Iceland’s hay crop yield has dropped about 25 percent, while pack ice in waters around Iceland and Greenland ports is becoming the hazard to navigation it was during the 17th and 18th centuries. … Some climatologists think that if the current cooling trend continues, drought will occur more frequently in India—indeed, through much of Asia, the world’s hungriest continent. … Some climatologists think that the present cooling trend may be the start of a slide into another period of major glaciation, popularly called an “ice age.”


This should be enough evidence that you continue to be one of the 3 worst liars on the board hairball...when you want to see the next 100 papers, just speak up...or maybe I will post them anyway...all that evidence of the concern over the cooling trend of the 60's - the 80's available here might just put the warmer nonsense that it never existed to bed....




 
First...I never used the word...Second, I don't think you are retarded...I think you are stupid and a dupe as evidenced by your belief in AGW without the first bit of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in support of the hypothesis.

No, guy when you claimed to be a critical thinker, you spelled critical retard wrong. Sorry you weren't clear on it.

"Doy, I know better than 95% of Climate scientists because I read something on the internet. Doy. Corky Smart."

"We"??? Your ass will be cowering behind a couch hoping that your beloved "gubermint" protects you because you are compliant. You, my leftard friend, are a gutless, cowardly piece of shit.

Naw, I was just having a little fun at the expense of paranoid loons. The sad part is you do take that kind of talk seriously.
 
First...I never used the word...Second, I don't think you are retarded...I think you are stupid and a dupe as evidenced by your belief in AGW without the first bit of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in support of the hypothesis.

No, guy when you claimed to be a critical thinker, you spelled critical retard wrong. Sorry you weren't clear on it.

The only one not clear here is you... I don't use the word... Feel free to use the global search feature on this site for any instance of me using that word...you will find none..

Typical of you warmers...you don't check anything...like your belief in AGW, you believe in your own superiority with no evidence whatsoever to support the belief.

Now about that observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the anthropogenic component of the AGW hypothesis...that you claim exists....still haven't found the first shred...right?....are you honest enough with yourself to ask yourself why it doesn't seem to be anywhere to be found..and what that might mean with regard to the AGW narrative?

Of course you haven't
 
Last edited:
The only one not clear here is you... I don't use the word... Feel free to use the global search feature on this site for any instance of me using that word...you will find none..

No, but I'm sure it's used about you a lot.

"Doooy, Corky Smarter than 95% of Climate Scientists."

"Shut up, Retard".

"Joe said a no-word. joe said a no-word!!!"

Now about that observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the anthropogenic component of the AGW hypothesis..

You mean the stuff other people already posted in this thread and you ignored because you don't want it to be true?
 
So today the climate will be a very cool 60 degrees in Virginia. Next week the climate will be in the 80s, so is this a warming trend? I guess it is, as the temperature went up 20 degrees in one week. But, and liberals are always butts, I remember that these occurrences were called Indian Summers. Is this now politically incorrect as it may offend a liberal, using the native American term to describe a weather event? If it does offend you, then go to Cuba, I am tired of you being offended, because just you liberals living offends me.
 
So today the climate will be a very cool 60 degrees in Virginia. Next week the climate will be in the 80s, so is this a warming trend? I guess it is, as the temperature went up 20 degrees in one week. But, and liberals are always butts, I remember that these occurrences were called Indian Summers. Is this now politically incorrect as it may offend a liberal, using the native American term to describe a weather event? If it does offend you, then go to Cuba, I am tired of you being offended, because just you liberals living offends me.

Guy, that's not "climate', that's weather. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference.

The thing is, "Indian Summers" were events that happened on a regular basis. What is happening now, with melting permafrost causing buildings to collapse in Canada and Alaska, or the Arctic being ice-free for certain times of the year, is not normal.

Oh, you do realize that Native Americans are not from India, right?
 
So today the climate will be a very cool 60 degrees in Virginia. Next week the climate will be in the 80s, so is this a warming trend? I guess it is, as the temperature went up 20 degrees in one week. But, and liberals are always butts, I remember that these occurrences were called Indian Summers. Is this now politically incorrect as it may offend a liberal, using the native American term to describe a weather event? If it does offend you, then go to Cuba, I am tired of you being offended, because just you liberals living offends me.

Guy, that's not "climate', that's weather. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference.

The thing is, "Indian Summers" were events that happened on a regular basis. What is happening now, with melting permafrost causing buildings to collapse in Canada and Alaska, or the Arctic being ice-free for certain times of the year, is not normal.

Oh, you do realize that Native Americans are not from India, right?
Guy, that's not "climate', that's weather
Finally , an honest answer from a liberal. Took a while, but now there can be hope for more enlightenment.
 
So today the climate will be a very cool 60 degrees in Virginia. Next week the climate will be in the 80s, so is this a warming trend? I guess it is, as the temperature went up 20 degrees in one week. But, and liberals are always butts, I remember that these occurrences were called Indian Summers. Is this now politically incorrect as it may offend a liberal, using the native American term to describe a weather event? If it does offend you, then go to Cuba, I am tired of you being offended, because just you liberals living offends me.

Guy, that's not "climate', that's weather. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference.

The thing is, "Indian Summers" were events that happened on a regular basis. What is happening now, with melting permafrost causing buildings to collapse in Canada and Alaska, or the Arctic being ice-free for certain times of the year, is not normal.

Oh, you do realize that Native Americans are not from India, right?
Also Deniers like you Joe, don't realize how the liberal elites are duping you left and right. Do you remember this?

'stuck In Our Own Experiment': Leader Of Trapped Team Insists Polar Ice Is Melting
"We're stuck in our own experiment," the Australasian Antarctic Expedition said in a statement. We came to Antarctica to study how one of the biggest icebergs in the world has altered the system by trapping ice. We ... are now ourselves trapped by ice surrounding our ship.

"Sea ice is disappearing due to climate change, but here ice is building up," the Australasian Antarctic Expedition said in a statement.
It is like liberals saying that the Polar Vortex of North America didn't count for global warming because it is only 14% of the rest of the earth. Then liberals started showing how 1 side of Antarctic sea ice was melting because of global warming and it was found out this..

Underwater volcanoes, not climate change, reason behind melting of West Antarctic Ice Sheet
Underwater volcanoes, not climate change, reason behind melting of West Antarctic Ice Sheet.
When you understand the reason for the hysterics of liberalism and their religious beliefs of man made climate change, you know they have some money involved in that liberal scam. Joe says he has 2 houses, that use up CO2 to keep both of them running. Now why would Joe be such a polluter and should he sell off one of his houses, to cut his CO2 footprint in half? Do as they say not as they do. We are supposed to give up our happiness so they can have theirs.
 
First...I never used the word...Second, I don't think you are retarded...I think you are stupid and a dupe as evidenced by your belief in AGW without the first bit of observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence in support of the hypothesis.

No, guy when you claimed to be a critical thinker, you spelled critical retard wrong. Sorry you weren't clear on it.

"Doy, I know better than 95% of Climate scientists because I read something on the internet. Doy. Corky Smart."

"We"??? Your ass will be cowering behind a couch hoping that your beloved "gubermint" protects you because you are compliant. You, my leftard friend, are a gutless, cowardly piece of shit.

Naw, I was just having a little fun at the expense of paranoid loons. The sad part is you do take that kind of talk seriously.
sorry, but I must interject here. you said:

I was just having a little fun at the expense of paranoid loons.

what is it we're supposedly paranoid about? I mean you're paranoid that the world will act like a vacuum and suck your ass into some void cause of CO2. Dude, now that is paranoia times ten. So instead bubba, it is you that is paranoid. Just so we're all clear.

Oh, and you didn't post the quote from SSDD of the word you accused him of writing, so until that happens, you're again a liar.

Now carry on with your stupid.
 
[

You mean the stuff other people already posted in this thread and you ignored because you don't want it to be true?

Nope...I mean the stuff that doesn't exist.....it has been interesting to see what people post thinking that it was observed, measured, quantified, empirical evidence supporting the anthropogenic component of the AGW hypothesis...it is interesting to see how easily some people have been fooled...you, apparently even easier...since you haven't posted anything....you apparently are working entirely on faith rather than some mistaken idea of what constitutes evidence. Not surprising.
 
No, but I'm sure it's used about you a lot.

"Doooy, Corky Smarter than 95% of Climate Scientists."

"Shut up, Retard".

"Joe said a no-word. joe said a no-word!!!"

Spoken like the idiot you are...but then I never really expected much more from the likes of you...you showed what you were made of the first time you tried to dodge your inability to provide the sort of evidence I asked for.
 

Forum List

Back
Top